View Full Version : How Little Trace Do You Leave Behind?
Odd Man Out
02-22-2010, 16:33
When reading about "Leave No Trace" principles, I have observed that "no trace" means different things to different people, depending on the circumstance and the individual's philosophy. For human waste, I have seen various recommendations, including pack out all waste, only solid waste, only toilet paper, or just bury it all so it can't be seen and will decay. Does LNT mean don't build campfires at all, or only in existing fire rings? For you, does LNT mean you can't swim (an leave behind traces of insect repellent and/or sunscreen in the pond)? If I broadcast my coffee grounds into the woods so that no one will ever see them, am I leaving a trace or not? Are my carbide tipped trekking poles leaving a trace (those rubber tips don't last too long). So given that it is almost impossible for even the strictest LNT advocate to really leave not trace behind, what degree of a trace is typical for a long-distance AT hiker?
Leave no trace is a misnomer. Leave as little a trace as practically possible.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 16:42
Do your best so that others that follow you, aside from tracks, can't tell you were there.
This does not include CSI.
At beast, Leave No Trace is misguided. At worst, it is a scam to get people to continue to practice unsustainable hiking, and living. LNT as it is practiced is wrong, because it is only concerned with the impact of our lifestyles on the trail. LNT as it is practiced is wrong, because it continues to perpetuate the myth that the world of man is separate from the world of nature. We need to be concerned with the total impact of our choices, such as fuel cannisters, hiking sticks, food packaging, and more clothing and gear than we will ever wear out.
Sustainability should be our concern, not LNT.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 17:05
Sustainability should be our concern, not LNT.
Totally different issue.
Appalachian Tater
02-22-2010, 17:21
I see sustainability and LNT intertwined as well. In the Smokies or Lehigh Gap you see the devastation caused by pollution that is much worse than anything thoughtless hikers could do. I go to the beach and see all the garbage people leave behind at the end of the day but it's nothing compared to what washes up from the water or even the bacteria in the water from sewage overflow. The issues of the way we are destroying the planet on a grand scale are pretty hard to ignore if you think about them and are more important in my mind than how deep you bury #2 while hiking.
Also, as they say, LNT is a set of principles, not rules. I have no problem leaving fruit peels somewhere where they will decompose and no one will ever see them. I don't even have a problem with burning paper (only) in a fire pit--after all, paper is wood. I have taken a book or magazine out of a shelter and left it in a different one down the trail. Some people get upset about those things.
On the other hand, I don't put anything except the end of my water filter into a spring but have seen people treat them like bathtubs or beer coolers or dog washes. But would it really matter either way if the stream is in the watershed of a cattle farm?
Overall, there is more long-term danger in ignoring the big issues and focusing only on the small ones. Driving a vehicle that gets 12 mpg while being scrupulous about littering seems a little ridiculous in my mind.
Bury poop.
Carry out toilet paper.
Fires in existing fire rings only.
Swimming is fine.
Coffee grounds ok.
Carbon tip Treking poles?
scottdennis
02-22-2010, 17:33
I strive to make an impact that only a professional tracker could follow.
Sustainability should be our concern, not LNT.
Totally different issue.
I'm with JAK on this one. It's not a different issue, just a different locale. We are in the midst of the world ecology, and whatever we do has an impact. LNT was spawned by the visible damage we do to our heavy use recreation areas with such innocuous activities as hiking and camping. If you study a bit of anthropology, you can find that even when we were rather few people, a few million as opposed to the 6+ billion we are now, we were making marks from trail walking, riding and driving that are readable even now thousand or hundreds of years later. And enviro science is learning to discern the traces of our activities in the polar ice, atmosphere and oceans, as well as on the land. The world we inhabit is the trace of continuous activity by living organisms, including mankind, for millions of years. The reason LNT seems a bit dated now is simply because we understand better that the attempt to limit it to trails and campgrounds is futile: Whatever we do, we leave our marks, and they all matter. We cannot simply stop leaving evidence of our existence, without leaving ourselves as well. The point now is that we must reduce our impact for undesirable change as much as we can in order not to change the world into a place we can't comfortably inhabit. We are the result of a world not unlike what we find around us today, minus the garbage and changes we have made through our cities, farms and industrial activities. If we change the world so that resemblance is no longer dominant, we will be in trouble, along with the plants and animals that co-evolved with us
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 17:49
If you think that LNT has anything to do with reusing a McDonald's wrapper from lunch today, IMO, you are FOS.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 17:51
I strive to make an impact that only a professional tracker could follow.
bingo.....
or CSI;)
The Will
02-22-2010, 17:54
Sustainability and LNT.
It seems that they are both applications of the same principle and distinguished only by the specific definitions we have ascribed to them. Each deserves emphasis. Each could be improved upon. I can see LNT as a subheading beneath sustainability. I don't understand why LNT would have to be minimized for the other to receive greater attention.
Appalachian Tater
02-22-2010, 17:58
If you think that LNT has anything to do with reusing a McDonald's wrapper from lunch today, IMO, you are FOS.Well, you pick an extreme example but the point is it's not enough to minimize impact at a campsite. There are so many humans it is necessary to minimize impact on the planet as a whole. Same principles apply either way. All those dead trees in the Smokies are pretty gut-wrenching to me, worse than a few wads of toilet paper here and there.
Nuthatch
02-22-2010, 18:01
Carry out toilet paper.Why? Toilet paper is wood. Totally biodegradable.
JustaTouron
02-22-2010, 18:12
I see sustainability and LNT intertwined as well.
I see them as two totally different things. Using a petro based stove instead of a fire is LNT. Using a wood fire instead of petro is sustainable.
Also, as they say, LNT is a set of principles, not rules. I have no problem leaving fruit peels somewhere where they will decompose and no one will ever see them. I don't even have a problem with burning paper (only) in a fire pit--after all, paper is wood. I have taken a book or magazine out of a shelter and left it in a different one down the trail. Some people get upset about those things.
quoting you on that because you said exactly my thoughts and better than I could.
On the other hand, I don't put anything except the end of my water filter into a spring but have seen people treat them like bathtubs or beer coolers or dog washes. .
i agree with bubble bath and dog wash, what is wrong with using a stream as a beer cooler? The beer only stays in there for a little while and at worst you are adding what ever bit of dirt might be on the outside of the can. Not packing the empties out, I have a problem with using a stream to cool the beer before drinking it seems perfectly LNT.
I strive to make an impact that only a professional tracker could follow.
bingo.....
or CSI;)
If you strive to do this on the AT or any other heavy use trail, you are, to coin a phrase, "FOS". Ordinary use of such a trail, meaning just the multiple foot falls, makes a trail that many have noted is hard to miss. Your professional tracker would have no difficulty following you, and countless others.
Now remember that the AT is heavily maintained. All that maintenance is an ecological impact. Then recall that the AT is used by all the local four-foots when we are not there, especially at night. They find the defined trail useful, and they reinforce our trail. In the North Country of Canada, most of the portage trails and overland routes follow game trails, mostly moose and other large ungulates. They were defined trails before the people came, and reinforced after.
It all interlocks, and we can't ignore our own impact. To me, the argument is not about slipping unnoticed off the trail to hang or pitch an overnight shelter. It's about all the "ordinary" impacts we have that we can't escape or avoid without ceasing our activities entirely.
Appalachian Tater
02-22-2010, 18:23
I see them as two totally different things. Using a petro based stove instead of a fire is LNT. Using a wood fire instead of petro is sustainable.
That sounds more like intertwined to me! Definitely some kind of relationship, even if you see it as inverse.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 18:26
If you strive to do this on the AT or any other heavy use trail, you are, to coin a phrase, "FOS". Ordinary use of such a trail, meaning just the multiple foot falls, makes a trail that many have noted is hard to miss. Your professional tracker would have no difficulty following you, and countless others.
Oh, I see. Hiking on a well marked/travelled trail by YOUR definition violates LNT.
What pap.........:rolleyes:
The Outsider
02-22-2010, 18:27
If you read the principles of Leave No Trace on their website (http://www.lnt.org/programs/principles.php (http://www.lnt.org/programs/principles.php)) you'll see they are actually quite well defined, I would be surprised if there are many that anyone would find very controversial. I don't see any conflict between sustainability and LNT ethics. These are suggested "best practices" and are intended to educate people about how they can minimize their impact on the backcountry environment, there are of course many things you can do to reduce your impact on the planet as a whole as well, which LNT is not intended to replace but expand on.
scottdennis
02-22-2010, 18:38
So I'm FOS for thinking that I can maneuver through an area without leaving a discernible clue that I was there? I'll have you know that 99.9% of wildlife leave more of a trace than me, particularly when I make a concerted effort to minimize my impact.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 18:41
I'll have you know that 99.9% of wildlife leave more of a trace than me....
Congratulations.......:rolleyes:
Chin Music, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. Look, if you are out in some fragile place like a desert, or an alpine meadow, then the passage of just one person can leave a trace that can be followed for a long time. Or out in slick rock country, leaving garbage about will last for a lone, long time. Ok, in these places, the idea of LNT you are holding on to makes some sense all by itself.
Not so much in a well watered forest or meadow. There, everything gets buried or decomposed pretty fast, and footprints don't last very long either. Unless you are accompanied by a horde of others, also leaving footprints, garbage and other traces. Now add in the metal and plastic that wasn't really a problem until a few decades ago.
It's not really a matter of skill anymore. And I, too, like to slip off the trail to sleep for a few hours, leaving nothing discernible behind. But if enough people do this in the same spot, night after night, in the end it will still become a parking lot or a campsite.
The problem with LNT as a catch phrase or a philosophy is that its applicability varies according to the environment and the degree of use. The little white flags that people leave behind are just cellulose, unfortunately not wood anymore, and they will break down, but in what amount of time, and how much more will be added during that time? It's never a problem to leave one piece of garbage. It's a problem when all you can see is garbage.
When we are 9 billion, how many places will be free of garbage? How many mountain meadows will be pristine? How many McDonalds wrappers will be filling waste dumps?
You want to believe you can preserve things just as they are now by LNT. What I'm saying is that you may be able to, but you and a few billion other people can't anymore. LNT is a beginning, but not a sufficient end.
Rockhound
02-22-2010, 18:50
Americans, myself included, are the most unsustainable creatures on the planet. We live in a CONSUMEr based society. It's all about bigger, better, faster, more. If it's broke get a new one. If it's old get a new one. We live in huge houses, waste tons of energy, drive gas guzzling trucks then bitch when the price of gas goes up a few pennies. Some of us enjoy hiking and some of us hikers like to get on high LNT horses. Great, you packed all that food packaging out. Locally you left no trace. Globally that carbon footprint just keeps getting bigger and bigger. As far as LNT goes just don't be an idiot. Pack it in, pack it out.
How much of trace do I leave? Depends on how long I use my Etch-a-sketch.:banana
JustaTouron
02-22-2010, 18:56
That sounds more like intertwined to me! Definitely some kind of relationship, even if you see it as inverse.
My point was that although there can be overlap between the two. LNT practices and sustainablity are two different concepts.
These guys preach LNT www.earthroamer.com (http://www.earthroamer.com) I think we can agree there is nothing sustainable in there approach.
Likewise leaving peanut shell on the trail is very sustainable...but leaves a trace.
Rockhound
02-22-2010, 19:02
If you think that LNT has anything to do with reusing a McDonald's wrapper from lunch today, IMO, you are FOS.
LNT means you would pack that wrapper out of the woods and dispose of it in a proper receptacle. Sustainability means you would never have eaten at McDonalds to begin with. They refuse to convert their fleet of trucks to bio diesel even though it would be fairly easy and inexpensive to do. Every stop could be a free gas station for them. They would save millions upon millions of dollars in gas but they refuse to entertain the idea. Imagine instead of wasting millions of gallons of fryer oil each day pouring it down the drain, it was insted converted to fuel.
Appalachian Tater
02-22-2010, 19:11
My point was that although there can be overlap between the two. LNT practices and sustainablity are two different concepts.
These guys preach LNT www.earthroamer.com (http://www.earthroamer.com) I think we can agree there is nothing sustainable in there approach.
Likewise leaving peanut shell on the trail is very sustainable...but leaves a trace.That website is funny, I just looked at the picture and didn't read it to know that I don't think we're disagreeing.
However, I would probably find someplace to throw my peanut shells out of sight where they would not be seen and would decompose. That is even more sustainable than having them go to a dump where they can't decompose and in my book is still LNT.
ChinMusic
02-22-2010, 19:20
LNT means you would pack that wrapper out of the woods and dispose of it in a proper receptacle. Sustainability means you would never have eaten at McDonalds to begin with.
Again, bingo.
Both are noble endeavors, but not the same, and in some cases even opposed.
LNT clearly stands for "Leave No Tree", this is why i spent last summer working as a logger. A satisfying days work, and a great way to save for a 2010 thru hike.
I once spent a summer maintaining the camping area's along the St. Croix River (a popular canoe tripping route).. And it gave me a unique perspective on this issue and I too agree sustainability and LNT are connected..
Cleaning campsites, especially the firepits, you see all forms of half burnt disposable items.. Had these people considered carrying more durable (heavier) reusable items instead, they wouldn't be Leaving a Trace as well as existing in an unsustainable way.
Simple things like a real reusable toothbrush as opposed to single use disposable tooth brush. Nalgene's or reusable mug for drinking rather than disposable plastic/foam cups or bottles. Good quality freezer bags, that you can pack back home, clean and reuse rather than toss after a single use. A real pack liner rather than a disposable garbage bag. And so on... Further, those that have all the gear they need, but will continue to purchase new gear just because it's newer, faster, brighter, lighter...
Point being, the less people consume in the first place, the less they will have available to leave a trace... Regardless of being in the woods, at work or at home.. If you don't have it to leave, there will be no trace..
I try to practice LNT principles--because I believe that such principles are good for me, good for the earth, good for the trail and good for the people who must travel behind me.
However, there is the old phrase: "Penny wise. Pound foolish".
I have encountered LNT "fanatics" who will get extremely "bent out of shape" over "little things"--like metal tips on trekking poles, packing out toilet paper--and (believe it or not) someone moving a rock or a stick so it will not be under a tent that was being pitched!
The earth is pretty resilient and will survive such things. It really will. So relax! Erosion happens in nature--even in areas where humans do not frequent. (What caused the Grand Canyon?). Toilet paper will decompose--eventually. (Even when you pack it out--it still makes its way to the earth--either via a landfill or via a sewerage treatment plant). Moving a rock or a stick 5 feet won't cause the entire ecosystem to collapse--even if 4 million people do it each year. One forest fire (caused by a lightening strike) will "destroy" far more acres of forest land than hikers ever will. Yet, Mother Earth will recover from such things. So relax.
Ironically, the same people who have lectured me (or my friends) regarding the toilet paper or moving a stick--are often wearing 100% synthetic materials as they lecture us. (This synthetic material is usually made from non-renewable petroleum-based products). These same LNT "zealots" are often using high-tech hiking equipment that required the use of many natural resources to manufacture, transport and distribute. They flew across the country to reach the trailhead area on a jet which burned many gallons of fuel and traveled the last miles to the trailhead in a motor vehicle. (The roads and runways paved over numerous acres of land). Today, we are all currently discussing this topic while using computers and monitors which most of us replace and dispose of every few years.
On the trail, we use shelters and privies made by human hands. We cross manmade bridges. We sometimes hike down paved roads and past high voltage power lines and cellular phone towers. The trail itself alters the surface of the earth.
Thus, it seems sort of silly to angrily lecture someone regarding packing out toilet paper or moving a stick--while willingly utilizing all of this other stuff which is causing FAR more "damage" to the earth. I'm just sayin'....:D
flemdawg1
02-22-2010, 20:25
LNT means you would pack that wrapper out of the woods and dispose of it in a proper receptacle. Sustainability means you would never have eaten at McDonalds to begin with. They refuse to convert their fleet of trucks to bio diesel even though it would be fairly easy and inexpensive to do. Every stop could be a free gas station for them. They would save millions upon millions of dollars in gas but they refuse to entertain the idea. Imagine instead of wasting millions of gallons of fryer oil each day pouring it down the drain, it was insted converted to fuel.
Perhaps you should research before you talk.
http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/mcd/csr/report/environmental_responsibility/packaging_and_waste/recycling.html?DCSext.destination=http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/mcd/csr/report/environmental_responsibility/packaging_and_waste/recycling.html
njordan2
02-22-2010, 20:27
Everything is Leave No Trace. Given enough time, there will be no recognizable trace of anything. But it will all still be there, down to the very last atom.
When hiking, give a hoot: don't polute.
If you are wondering what defines poluting, here is the only definition that matters: If you think you are poluting; you are. If you think you are not; you are not.
Slosteppin
02-22-2010, 20:32
If you strive to do this on the AT or any other heavy use trail, you are, to coin a phrase, "FOS". Ordinary use of such a trail, meaning just the multiple foot falls, makes a trail that many have noted is hard to miss. Your professional tracker would have no difficulty following you, and countless others.
Now remember that the AT is heavily maintained. All that maintenance is an ecological impact. Then recall that the AT is used by all the local four-foots when we are not there, especially at night. They find the defined trail useful, and they reinforce our trail. In the North Country of Canada, most of the portage trails and overland routes follow game trails, mostly moose and other large ungulates. They were defined trails before the people came, and reinforced after.
Most hiking trails are designed, built and maintained so hikers will make less overall impact on the environment.
I give many hours each year building and maintaining another, much longer, trail. The whole point of maintaining trails is to encourage hikers to stay on the trail rather than taking shortcuts or widening wet areas. We build bridges and bordwalks primarily to protect the forest not to make it easier for hikers. Trails are all about reducing impact on the environment.
Slosteppin
Appalachian Tater
02-22-2010, 20:34
McDonald's is a good example of what Prain4u is talking about. McDonald's can recycle all the oil it wants but its entire business model of selling cheap industrially-produced beef is unsustainable on account of the hundreds or thousands of millions of tons of waste cows produce every year alone. Workers die falling into pools of it.
Sometimes these situations are almost humorous, such as burning meat made from corn made from oil to produce electricity:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1204525/Vegetarians-outrage-Tesco-admits-macabre-practice-turning-date-meat-electricity.html
Whacky.
A large part of LNT is common sense and decency.
A large part of LNT is delusional descetive pseudo-sustainability.
Why doesn't LNT.org take a stand against unsustainable products and practices?
Why? Because they would lose corporate support.
The secret to success in the 21st century is Sustainability.
If you can fake that, the rest is easy.
Here is what LNT.org is doing with respect to sustainability...
http://www.lnt.org/aboutUs/sustainability.php
The impression is they are merely keeping step with their corporate partners.
They are not advocating sustainable products and practices, which they should be.
Here is where they get there money...
http://www.lnt.org/support/partner.php
In short, LNT is a business, NOT a ethos.
I don't need another corporation telling me right from wrong.
I can figure out what is right on my own, and they are not it.
JustaTouron
02-22-2010, 22:21
A large part of LNT is common sense and decency.
A large part of LNT is delusional descetive pseudo-sustainability.
Why doesn't LNT.org take a stand against unsustainable products and practices?
Why? Because they would lose corporate support.
The secret to success in the 21st century is Sustainability.
If you can fake that, the rest is easy.
LNT is about not littering, it is not about sustainability.
LNT as a stand alone prinipal has merit and value.
If the previous camper to the campsite used a nylon tent, goretex jacket, and had everything wrapped in individual plastic bags it is far from sustainable, but if they packed out all their trash, then the campsite is fine for my use.
If the previous camper to the campsite had a canvas tent, used natural fibers but left a excrement in the middle of the campsite it is sustatianable but the campsite is unusable.
LNT as principle of not littering and leaving the area in good shape is a worthy principal.
You seem to care about sustainablity. Thats fine. But it is not the mission of LNT. LNT doesn't care if you drove to trailhead in an SUV or use the petro fabrics that 99% of all hikers use for clothes, tent, sleeping bag and pack.
That doesn't make LNT sell outs. It simply means that have a mission different than yours.
wvgrinder
02-22-2010, 22:24
Take only ginseng. Leave only garbage.
Do we really need LNT.ORG to tell people not to litter?
Or is their real mission statement was to perpetuate the myth that LNT is sufficient?
It seems the answer to both questions is a resounding YES.
I am not really sure which is the most offensive.
Lets try to flesh out the thinking here...
So those who feel that sustainability and LNT are different issues, do you believe that litter on the trail is somehow more damaging than litter in a landfill?
Our world is quickly becoming one big landfill, so simply being careful where you dispose of your waste, does not reduce your waste, it's just being selective about where it's stored...
Consume less, waste less...
mweinstone
02-23-2010, 00:06
i belive crack cocaine is bad for all people no matter how much trash they make.
That's not the LNT theme song.
That's the Vancouver Olympics theme song.
what about butning trash? not leaving canisters and glass bottles in the fire pit but burning trash?
I think it depends on how much trash, and what kind of trash.
Also, why you needed to buy the trash in the first place.
I feel less guilty about buying a Tim's Coffee in their non-recyclable wax paper cups when I taking it hiking because I re-use it a few times, then use it as tinder, whereas at home it ends up in the landfill, which is at least better than where many end up.
If you burn trash, only burn your paper trash, and definitely not plastics or foil... They may shrink or change shape, but they make an awful mess to clean out of fire pits...
Lets try to flesh out the thinking here...
So those who feel that sustainability and LNT are different issues, do you believe that litter on the trail is somehow more damaging than litter in a landfill?
Our world is quickly becoming one big landfill, so simply being careful where you dispose of your waste, does not reduce your waste, it's just being selective about where it's stored...
Consume less, waste less...
That is sort of my point regarding the "need" to "pack out" any used toilet paper.
In MOST instances packing out used toilet paper is sort of silly and achieves little--except causing some people to feel good about their LNT efforts.
Pack it out to where? To a garbage can that takes it to be buried in a landfill? Pack it out to a privy that is basically just another (bigger) hole in the ground? Flush it down a toilet (wasting water)--and putting the toilet paper back into the earth via a hole in the ground called a sewerage treatment plant? :-?
As long as we don't litter or pollute an environmentally sensitive area or an "inhabited" area with our cat holes and toilet paper, does it really matter whether we bury the toilet paper in a little cat hole near the AT, in a slightly bigger hole called a privy, in an even bigger hole called a landfill, or a really large hole called a sewerage treatment plant? Probably not (in MOST instances).
The real answer that I should buy my Tim's in a re-usable coffee mug, whether I am on my way to the trail or not. Tim's encourages people to do this, so I can sort of understand why they don't sell their coffee in recycable coffee cups. Not sure yet what the best material is for re-usable mugs etc, but I know I have enough already I should never have to buy another.
As for hiding my duty, I do my business, wipe, then dig a pit, role in the waste, burn the paper and bury...
Putting it like that, it sounds very similar to the daily lives of our politicians and business leaders...
mweinstone
02-23-2010, 00:32
if pollution was needed to keep us alive, no one would work hard at it. clean would be everywhere killing us.
if pollution kills us then their will be no more polluters.
looks like a win win to me.
Well, the entire earth's biosphere is built upon a constantly recycling slag heap,
so you may have something there.
I leave behind organic waste, such as bodily excretions, tp, q-tips and food. I'll take some trouble to dig a pit and/or burn the waste.
Rockhound
02-23-2010, 08:49
Perhaps you should research before you talk.
http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/mcd/csr/report/environmental_responsibility/packaging_and_waste/recycling.html?DCSext.destination=http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/mcd/csr/report/environmental_responsibility/packaging_and_waste/recycling.html
I did but it was in 2003. Nice to know steps are being made.thanks for the update. Sad to see the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world even within the McDonalds organization. I'm sure that has a do with an apathetic mindset most Americans seem to have. Hard to have separate recycling bins when lazy fat asses are just going to treat them all like trash cans. Of course this article is also put out by McDonalds. Perhaps it's just a publicity piece and they are just doing the minimum for appearances sake. They will take the time and effort to sell their used fryer oil, but nobody in that organization has thought of converting their fleet to bio diesel? It just seems like a no brainer to me.
scottdennis
02-23-2010, 09:10
Yes I believe litter is far worse than in a landfill. A landfill will process the waste to accelerate the decomposing of trash. Estimates of how long it takes things to decompose in a landfill are VASTLY overstated. In the wild, it takes far more time, because it's not covered (at least covered as much as it would be in a landfill) and it does not have near the pressure of the weight of being covered and packed down.
As for toilet paper, yes it would decompose faster in a sewage treatment or septic tank. The "good" bacteria in the sewage eats away at the paper. In a cat hole you don't have as much of that action going on. With that said, toilet paper is wood and it does not take long for it to decompose.
mweinstone
02-23-2010, 09:10
jesus is all the polution control i need.
controlling pollution causes polution.
polution is a word none of us know what it means or where it came from.
we care more about sex than polution cause one is life and one death.
only careing about polution control is of any good use. actually doing anything about it is bad.as all of our doings cause polution.
no one has ever died of polution.
all death has been caused by the same thing.
when atom lost his nutron balls and diddnt stand up to eve and started a nucler reaction.duh,...everyone knows that.
scottdennis
02-23-2010, 09:16
we care more about sex than polution cause one is life and one death.
Well that and because it's just a whole lot more fun too! :D
JustaTouron
02-23-2010, 10:14
Lets try to flesh out the thinking here...
So those who feel that sustainability and LNT are different issues, do you believe that litter on the trail is somehow more damaging than litter in a landfill?
Yes. Absolutely.
I also think it is better to "go" in the toilet than to "go" on the floor in the house.
I also think that it is better to take the trash out of the kitchen then to store it indefinitely in the house.
While sustainability is a valid goal. And it is better not to create waste than to properly dispose of it.
There is a huge difference between littering and packing out the trash and putting it in the garbage. LNT is a valid goal independent of the sustainability movement.
LNT are good principles but what amazes me is there's actually a 5 Day Master Educator Course (http://lnt.org/training/mastereducator.php) on LNT!
I mean 5 days to cover seven principles? Is the course for slow learners or what?
JustaTouron
02-23-2010, 10:50
LNT are good principles but what amazes me is there's actually a 5 Day Master Educator Course (http://lnt.org/training/mastereducator.php)on LNT!
I mean 5 days to cover seven principles? Is the course for slow learners or what?
The course doesn't cover the seven principles, it cover methods of education.
And how to deal with stubborn idiots (e.g. Jak and his campaign to discredit the LNT principals because they are don't adopt all of sustainability.)
JustaTouron
02-23-2010, 10:50
sorry not jak, daja.
Plodderman
02-23-2010, 10:50
I take all my trash out, build no fires and try to keep from disturbing the area as much as possible. Human waiste I bury but everything ealse is coming out with me.
The course doesn't cover the seven principles, it cover methods of education.
And how to deal with stubborn idiots (e.g. Jak and his campaign to discredit the LNT principals because they are don't adopt all of sustainability.)
Not trying to discredit LNT principles at all, rather suggesting that with a broader view, and a more sustainable approach, LNT principles would not be required... If what you carry into the woods were not so overpackaged/disposable, you'd have little to leave behind in the first place.. But this is symantics..
Be a little less selfish and me oriented and perhaps you will see the forest for the trees...
LNT is the equivellent of the NIMBY crowd...
And for the record, other than human waste, everything else comes home with me, but I don't just practice this when in the woods, I spend everyday seeking ways to reduce my impact... I guess for some, that only applies while hiking..
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc289/EricBlair_photos/BeatingaDeadHorse.gif
Nuthatch
02-23-2010, 11:23
LNT are good principles but what amazes me is there's actually a 5 Day Master Educator Course (http://lnt.org/training/mastereducator.php) on LNT!
I mean 5 days to cover seven principles? Is the course for slow learners or what?I think the slow learners are the ones walking around in the forest with a ziplock full of fshiat-soaked wood (tp). :D
LNT is in fact a business. Just using the three letters together is a violation of the business's copyright. I practice LNT to the extent possible, though I think a more effective slogan is "Carry In, Carry Out." As several have pointed out LNT is an impossible concept to achieve. Every step leaves a trace. So increasingly the message is ignored. The trails were cleaner when the message was simpler. "Don't litter," "Carry in, carry out."
A properly constructed cat hole is the least polluting way to dispose of bodily wastes and TP. The microbes in the top few inches of soil quickly cause the wastes to decompose harmlessly, leaving a valuable soil nutrient behind. A sewage treatment plant is the worst way to dispose of such wastes. The liquid mostly ends up in a river. The solids get burnt or buried for the most part, polluting the air, or wasting valuable organic matter. The chemicals used to kill virus and bacteria are equally deadly to life in rivers and streams.
Weary
The course doesn't cover the seven principles, it cover methods of education.
And how to deal with stubborn idiots (e.g. Jak and his campaign to discredit the LNT principals because they are don't adopt all of sustainability.)
Hmmm, apparently only a a small portion of it. Most of the course curriculum deals with learning LNT techniques.
From the webpage:
"The first day is spent in a classroom, introducing the course and schedule, providing in-depth information on the overall Leave No Trace program and the Center for Outdoor Ethics, reviewing gear, and packing. The remaining days are spent in the field on a short backcountry trip learning and practicing the principles of Leave No Trace.
....... You will learn Leave No Trace techniques through skits, discussions, and hands-on activities. To practice Leave No Trace teaching strategies in a supportive, educational environment, each participant will teach a short session geared toward minimum impact Leave No Trace concerns".
So, do most people need skits, discussions, and hands-on activities to learn 7 simple principles?
Most of the hikers I know don't.
So, do most people need skits, discussions, and hands-on activities to learn 7 simple principles?
Most of the hikers I know don't.
Growing up, we learned not to litter very quickly.
If we were caught littering, Pappa Mags would use his callused, thick hands from many years of being sheet metalist to give us a backhand to the head.
LNT lessons learned in 30 seconds! :banana
mister krabs
02-23-2010, 15:24
When I am in the backcountry, I follow this:
http://www.lnt.org/programs/principles.php
LNT is a framework of principles, not a set of laws or rules. It ain't the tablets come down from the mount. It is similar to countless other frameworks in that it is a collection of best practices that you can apply to your individual situation to reduce negative impact on your immediate environment.
No more no less. The fact that people make money off the framework has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the principles.
sir limpsalot
02-23-2010, 18:34
I'm gonna take that one further mister krabs "LNT is a framework of principles...for people to use in their wilderness recreation". In other words "Leave No Trace so the next folks trying to have a wilderness experience aren't jarred by seeing your trash lying around proving they ain't alone out there". Just like you don't wan't to see your girlfriend's ex-boyfriend's stuff laying around her bedroom when you're there. the deer and animals of the woods could care less if there's empty beer cans and trash laying around: LNT is a social guideline for outdoor enthusiasts.
Appalachian Tater
02-23-2010, 18:48
I'm gonna take that one further mister krabs "LNT is a framework of principles...for people to use in their wilderness recreation". In other words "Leave No Trace so the next folks trying to have a wilderness experience aren't jarred by seeing your trash lying around proving they ain't alone out there". Just like you don't wan't to see your girlfriend's ex-boyfriend's stuff laying around her bedroom when you're there. the deer and animals of the woods could care less if there's empty beer cans and trash laying around: LNT is a social guideline for outdoor enthusiasts.
This turtle would disagree with you about your garbage not being harmful:
http://conservationreport.com/2009/04/24/animal-welfare-turtle-deformed-by-being-trapped-in-a-six-pack-plastic-ring/
In fact, plenty of animals are trapped are harm by garbage. Research it.
Appalachian Tater
02-23-2010, 18:49
*trapped or harmed by garbage. D**ned phone rang.
I strive to make an impact that only a professional tracker could follow.
i concur.
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
Rockhound
02-23-2010, 19:08
For those attempting their 1st thru. Although it may violate LNT principles, Dumping expensive unwanted gear between Springer and Mountain Crossings is perfectly acceptable as it will be collected promptly after you leave it. In fact if anyone is starting with a Hubba Hubba HP. Save the time and effort of starting with it and just ship it to me now.
sir limpsalot
02-23-2010, 19:10
This turtle would disagree with you about your garbage not being harmful:
In fact, plenty of animals are trapped are harm by garbage. Research it.
I knew there'd be a least one bunnyhugger on that one.:D. LNT aint about gillnetting and sixpack-holder garrots. It's about managing a resource for the enjoyment of people, trying to keep it as pristine as possible.
Originally Posted by jesse
Carry out toilet paper.
Why? Toilet paper is wood. Totally biodegradable.
Yes it is biodegradable, but how long? It is unsightly during the process. And no paper is not wood. No more than glass is sand.
freefall
02-23-2010, 20:31
I hammock and only use fires when it is really cold. I also carry out all trash and bury human waste.
Maybe the worst thing I do is add water to my cook pot and then distribute it away from the shelter/ campsite.
I don't carry toilet paper. I use leaves, or snow, or whatever.
Might as well get the compleate wilderness experience. :)
In a sensitive desert I would pack out my poop.
I would probably pack my poop off a mountain peak also.
I've also stopped using ziplocks.
I might revisit that in a desert or mountaintop, but probably not.
I like being plastic free, except for polyester and nylon. Good stuff.
mweinstone
02-23-2010, 20:45
when i fling a boogie, i go looking for it tail tucked. not.
freefall
02-23-2010, 20:47
I don't carry toilet paper. I use leaves, or snow, or whatever.
.
Yep, I've even used rocks.
Exactly. "Guilt only works if you let it Batman."
lol. that was in response to the other post.
scottdennis
02-23-2010, 23:04
I don't carry toilet paper. I use leaves, or snow, or whatever.
Might as well get the compleate wilderness experience. :)
In a sensitive desert I would pack out my poop.
I would probably pack my poop off a mountain peak also.
I've also stopped using ziplocks.
I might revisit that in a desert or mountaintop, but probably not.
I like being plastic free, except for polyester and nylon. Good stuff.
I'm sorry, but I ain't wiping my butt with no snow!! LOL!
joeboxer
02-23-2010, 23:20
Snow is amazing to wipe your butt with! Definitely a lot better than sticks or rocks, seeing that using leaves or small animals isn't LNT kosher. Think about, it its like an icy cold b-day that just melts back into the ground!
scottdennis
02-23-2010, 23:22
It reminds me of the bear that looked at the rabbit and asked "do you have a problem with crap sticking to your fur?" The rabbit replied, "not at all." So the bear picked up the rabbit and wiped his butt with him.
Odd Man Out
02-24-2010, 15:07
Thanks all for the lively and mostly civilized discussion. I started this thread and was surprised to find so many variations of opinions. I was expecting more practical answers such as "this is what I do" etc... Instead the discussion went of on tangent about sustainability. But that's ok. I have enjoyed reading all the comments. I'm glad to see that if I choose to leave a trace, I will be in good company, assuming what I leave behind doesn't impact the enjoyment of others to follow.
I have been re-watching Ken Burns films about the NPS which are being broadcast again this month on our local PBS station. In last week's episode, he explored the founding of the NPS, whose original charter states:
"...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
In the film, the commentators pointed out the inherent ambiguity and conflict built within this mission statement, i.e. our use of the parks necessarily changes them for future generations and the mechanism by which we attempt to accomplish this impossible goal is not fixed, but rather it is for us and future generations to decide.
As for the link between LNT and sustainability, I will be equally ambivalent. I agree that LNT philosophies align well with those of global sustainability. But on the other hand, I agree that the LNT ethic was designed to apply quite narrowly to a very small aspect of our life (enjoying the wild areas we aspire to protect). So certainly there are some people who choose to LNT, but then lead a very resource intensive lifestyle off the trail. Others may live a very sustainable lifestyle at home, and yet do not really know how to enjoy a park without wrecking it.
However, I feel that for most people, the two will go hand in hand. Last summer, I took my daughter on her first backpacking trip. Here she is proudly displaying our garbage bag (2 days of garbage for 2 people). If you look closely you will see some not sustainable plastic PB tubs. You will also see some onion skins I could have left to decay, but chose not to leave behind. I suspect that despite fact that we loaded down our packs with pounds of petroleum derived synthetic polymers, our trip probably had a smaller environmental footprint than most people's vacation. And more importantly, she came away with a real appreciation for both minimizing her environmental footprint at home as well as for "leaving as little trace as reasonably possible in the parks so that they can be preserved for the enjoyment of future generations" (that would be LALTARPITPSTTCBPFTEOFG).
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/carlsont/trash.jpg
Nicely put. We are definitely getting better.
My grandfather used to pour gasoline on the marsh behind the camp to keep the mosquitos down, and he was an avid outdoorsman.
For all the preaching, very few actually believe in LNT, or view it as a practical or even desirable thing. This is evidenced by the well worn path that extends over 2,000 miles from Georgia to Maine, along with all the white paint on the trees every few yards, and those wooden shacks every few miles. I could name many other examples, but you get the point.
At the end of the day, we all do what we can live with. But I have just as much right to leave my mark on this earth as any other living creature that spends time in the woods.
I don't much like seeing lots of trash in the woods, so I tend not to leave any...but I found a really cool spot in the national forest around here where somebody used to dump their trash about 40 or 50 years ago...found a bunch of cool old bottles there. I've heard out west you can find old tin cans in the desert that were left there by the early pioneers. Cool stuff...
Many different perspectives on this issue...but nobody practices LNT.
David@whiteblaze
02-25-2010, 23:36
In my opinion, the idea of LNT is that you should just walk where the trail is (the whole point of a trail...) pack everything out that you brought in, and make sure that everything is left just as it was when you came in. The principles that I follow would be more like: toilet paper can be left, just so long as it is buried with scat in the cat-hole. Fires in fire rings are ok, just use deadfall, and dont leave one hot when you leave. also on that note, paper trash can be burnt, plastic would depend on the warmth of the fire, thickness of the plastic, and not left as "kindling". Foil and cans are nos. putting a can into a fire to lose weight will probably just add the weight of soot to the can and make you less likely to remember it. stealth camping would be alright as long as you dont go around digging trenches and making a fire area and leaving it there. So, I would say that if someone with the LNT FBI came in with bloodhounds trained to smell out catholes and burnt oatmeal packets, I would be busted... If my dad came along behind me, he might say "ooh, look, someone with a trekking pole has been this way..." Also, as a butt-in to the debate about sustainibility vs. LNT, sustainibility encourages you to take a banana peel and compost it in your backyard wheras the LNT method encourages that the banana would be an eyesore and would competely cause the ecosystem to collapse until the trowelful of dirt is returned to the tropics... anyways, I'm going to go take the online training course and hopefully have a merry chuckle at it.
perdidochas
11-12-2013, 13:12
what about butning trash? not leaving canisters and glass bottles in the fire pit but burning trash?
LNT teaches no trash burning at all.
IMHO, burning paper (and paper only) in terms of trash is no big deal. The problem with burning trash is that burning paper ends up (with too many people) as burning plastic and styrofoam, etc.
perdidochas
11-12-2013, 13:15
That is sort of my point regarding the "need" to "pack out" any used toilet paper.
In MOST instances packing out used toilet paper is sort of silly and achieves little--except causing some people to feel good about their LNT efforts.
Pack it out to where? To a garbage can that takes it to be buried in a landfill? Pack it out to a privy that is basically just another (bigger) hole in the ground? Flush it down a toilet (wasting water)--and putting the toilet paper back into the earth via a hole in the ground called a sewerage treatment plant? :-?
As long as we don't litter or pollute an environmentally sensitive area or an "inhabited" area with our cat holes and toilet paper, does it really matter whether we bury the toilet paper in a little cat hole near the AT, in a slightly bigger hole called a privy, in an even bigger hole called a landfill, or a really large hole called a sewerage treatment plant? Probably not (in MOST instances).
All depends on your local. In most wettish forests, tp is no big deal, it decomposes in months. In dryer areas, it may take much longer.
Capt Nat
11-12-2013, 22:58
Someday all mankind will be gone and nature will quickly erase any evidence of our existence. Now we just need to respect one another, respect the earth, and live so as to be proud of our life...
I am a bit ambivalent about LNT.
Sure, it's a good idea. But when it come right down to it, LNT has little to do with preserving nature or protecting an ecosystem. Rather, it is about keeping things pretty in well travelled areas for the aesthetic benefit of folks like me. Don't get my wrong, "pretty" is good, but hardly a moral imperative.
kayak karl
11-12-2013, 23:12
Someday all mankind will be gone and nature will quickly erase any evidence of our existence.
Now it's been ten thousand years, man has cried a billion tears
For what, he never knew, now man's reign is through
But through eternal night, the twinkling of starlight
So very far away, maybe it's only yesterday
Wise Old Owl
11-12-2013, 23:24
LNT teaches no trash burning at all.
IMHO, burning paper (and paper only) in terms of trash is no big deal. The problem with burning trash is that burning paper ends up (with too many people) as burning plastic and styrofoam, etc.
Sorry - the LNT website in articals doesn't jive with this post... http://lnt.org/learn/7-principles
Minimize Campfire Impacts (http://lnt.org/learn/principle-5)
Campfires can cause lasting impacts to the backcountry. Use a lightweight stove for cooking and enjoy a candle lantern for light.
Where fires are permitted, use established fire rings, fire pans, or mound fires.
Keep fires small. Only use sticks from the ground that can be broken by hand.
Burn all wood and coals to ash, put out campfires completely, then scatter cool ashes.
- See more at: http://lnt.org/learn/7-principles#sthash.ANjxSa48.dpuf
Please, feel free to show thought process of what you are saying by backing it up evidence.
Team Dakota Joe
11-13-2013, 01:28
Team Dakota Joe supports the Leave no trace aspect of hiking the A.T.
Dakota Joe. Coming to a town near you.
http://www.facebook.com/TheAdventuresOfDakotaJoe
Dakota Joe
11-29-2013, 20:57
Leave no trace confuses me because everyone says something different. If we are supposed to leave no trace than why did they build shelters, erect privvies, post signs, and paint blazes? then they get mad when you write your name on a shelter wall next to hundreds of others. i apoplogize for that and am going back to clean mine off. how many other hikers have done that? you know. cleaned it off? i understand about garbage and environmental inpact but saw so much garbage on my hike that i packed out, found trashed shelters, and even metal roofing at one of them. I dont know what to think about LNT anymore. I feel like it is just another thing to argue about.
hikerboy57
11-29-2013, 21:13
if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.and as youve already pointed out,its a problem.
Odd Man Out
11-29-2013, 23:06
Leave no trace confuses me because everyone says something different. If we are supposed to leave no trace than why did they build shelters, erect privvies, post signs, and paint blazes? then they get mad when you write your name on a shelter wall next to hundreds of others. i apoplogize for that and am going back to clean mine off. how many other hikers have done that? you know. cleaned it off? i understand about garbage and environmental inpact but saw so much garbage on my hike that i packed out, found trashed shelters, and even metal roofing at one of them. I dont know what to think about LNT anymore. I feel like it is just another thing to argue about.
I think this is now the longest thread I ever started and I'm post #99 (let's go for 100 woot woot). My summary thoughts were on #86. All in all I thought it was a nice discussion (not really an argument). It seems to me that there always a balance requiring a cost-benefit analysis. Sometimes the benefit is great enough (not having to carry out toilet paper) that it outweighs the cost, i.e. trace (burying TP). But others will weigh that cost-benefit analysis differently and carry out their own TP and maybe even their own waste. The relative costs and benefits of any activity can be debated and you are likely to have as many solutions to the equations as their are hikers. When it comes to graffiti at shelter, the impact of the trace has been debated before. But what hasn't been discussed (that I recall), exactly what is the benefit of leaving that particular trace that outweighs the cost?
MuddyWaters
11-29-2013, 23:11
Areas like shelters, privys, fire rings, established campsites are "concentrated impact"
They limit damage to other areas, by concentrating it. They are sacrificed.
This is a good thing.
LNT is about preserving the experience for those that come after you.
Hill Ape
11-30-2013, 01:19
if we all just tried to do our best, it would all work out
Hairbear
11-30-2013, 09:28
Lnt is a great philosophical attempt. The preservation of a narrow ribbon of nature is not realistic in the entire scheme of things.
Our daily live effect the trails more than our action while we are there.
acid rain falls on the world not the trail.
we all chant lnt like it was a battle cry,but when we return home its lost.
if we didnt litter ,vandalize,and destroy habitats for our homes we would not have to seek out desolate places to revitalize what has been taken from us through waste and corruption.
what you consume in life has more effect on the trail than what you burn there.
lnt is a self appointed badge that makes us feel worthy of the purity of nature that we seek.
it wouldnt surprise me if the people that drum you to death with it are really the worst offenders off the trail.
if leave no trace is your life style off trail then the sight of the destruction has lost its shock value because its something you notice every day.
swjohnsey
11-30-2013, 15:57
Nothin' but poop.
Hairbear
12-01-2013, 10:08
Nothin' but poop.
White sail
The world is a wooden ship,the trail a white sail.
Built with the hardest wood so fine; the expectation of beauty,and to stand the test of time.
All placed their focus on the sail so white, they cleansed and shined it to the morning suns delight.
After years of service the wood started to sag, termites were the warning of of the ships that sailed by.
The crew just laughed and kept shining that sail.
At the end went to the ocean floor,the termites had their way for sure.
When the people gather to morn their loss,and examining the fate of leaving action to the coins toss.
They will call out what could have been done,but to no avail.
There is nothing left but memory of that pristine white sail.
Pooey poet
Hairbear
12-02-2013, 09:06
To me environmental preservation should not be taken lightly,its the hope a better life for our children.
As little as possible. With age I get better. Back before shelters were popular I believe the biggest messes were campfires build to stay warm and to try and dry out. Now I may forget something once in a while. Like lost my glasses once. Poop is poop its where one places the poop. I'm sure I leave behind a lot less than a moose which poops over 500 pounds a day.
Me too. Generally, LNT FOR ME, entails a professional tracker to know I was there. I try not to be so sloppy though. It's fun to track others especially when they're attempting to LNT. I did this on the AT. I knew there was miltary hiding under leaves, in holes, under fallen trees, at the base of rocks, behind trees, in trees, etc. For one, I could smell them. I hope they improved their techniques! I thought they neeeded to. Tracking others when they've attempted to LNT makes you more mindful of minmizing your own imprint.
Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints.
Easy enough ideal to work at, with the practical exception:
I also take poops (in appropriate places), and leave them.
MDSection12
12-02-2013, 22:25
Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints.
Easy enough ideal to work at, with the practical exception:
I also take poops (in appropriate places), and leave them.
Take nothing but pictures, poops and pictures of poops, leave nothing but footprints, poops and footprints in poops?
hikerboy57
12-02-2013, 22:28
its not the taking of the poops, but the leaving of the poops.
if more people took poops, there'd be none left to clutter the trail
Starchild
12-02-2013, 22:42
Do what you are capable of, you are a steward of the land for all those who will come after you, but you are also a human and a product of your upbringing, and also are not expected to be perfect. The general idea is if you can leave it better then you found it that would be great of you, if you must leave it worse due to circumstances that is understandable - we are all human, if you leave it worse because you have not learned the way of nature that is forgivable and correctable.
Dakota Joe
06-04-2014, 19:22
I love the whole LNT debate. Its funny to see people get all butt hurt. There are LNT signs nailed to way too many trees. Talk about leaving a trace! Semantics.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
squeezebox
06-05-2014, 01:05
LNT should be a way of life not just in the woods
I drive the 5 minutes to work instead of walking for 15 minutes.So who is being an LNT idiot.
I'll start walking to work.
Ricky&Jack
06-05-2014, 01:23
i havent done a long hike yet. But what do you do with your trash (food wrapers etc). It's not proper to burn them in a camp fire, is it?
So do you carry a seperate walmart/trash bacg and store all your trash for however long til you reach a town/trash can?
do you carry it on the outside of your pack?
or is there a hiker protocol that I havent read about yet?
illabelle
06-05-2014, 05:30
Most of our trash is generated from food wrappers/containers. We store food in zip-loc bags. Usually we just tuck the neatly folded wrapper back in the zip-loc. After a couple of meals, we can consolidate food, and have one zip-loc empty, which then becomes the trash bag. Toss it in a trash bin when we reach town. Carry it with our food until then. If you've got trash that's too dirty to put with food, then a separate bag is helpful. I usually carry a few extra grocery bags anyway. They're helpful for wet clothes, muddy camp shoes, sticky food wrappers, etc.
i havent done a long hike yet. But what do you do with your trash (food wrapers etc). It's not proper to burn them in a camp fire, is it?
So do you carry a seperate walmart/trash bacg and store all your trash for however long til you reach a town/trash can?
do you carry it on the outside of your pack?
or is there a hiker protocol that I havent read about yet?
rocketsocks
06-05-2014, 06:22
Once I left a big ole trace behind.
rocketsocks
06-05-2014, 06:23
...a pair of boots
Old Hiker
06-05-2014, 07:42
...a pair of boots
Didja at least salvage the laces? Maybe plant petunias in them before leaving them behind? :D
I'm hoping the only physical traces I leave are bodily function residues and size 13 wide footprints.
rocketsocks
06-05-2014, 07:57
Didja at least salvage the laces? Maybe plant petunias in them before leaving them behind? :D
I'm hoping the only physical traces I leave are bodily function residues and size 13 wide footprints.
Naw, the laces were trashed, so I packed em out.
...13's...that's a big ole foot print :D
If you repackage food prior to leaving on a hike, the actual trash generated is minimal. I can easily fit all trash for a 5-7 day segment into a quart size ziploc bag which is then disposed of when I reach a trash can. Of course, on the AT opportunities to dispose of trash usually appear much more frequently. It really is not an issue and no huge burden to pack everything out.
bangorme
06-05-2014, 09:19
To be honest, (and I'm not going to argue either way about it), but as long as dogs are on the trails, I really don't worry much a a strict following of the LNT protocols. I bury solid waste and toilet paper. I carry out everything I carry in as far as packaging goes. I never build fires. I don't do anything near water. That's it. If I eat an apple, I throw the core as far as I can into woods when I get away from a shelter area. Since I don't use shelters unless absolutely necessary, there is nothing I do that is magnified by 1,000 other people doing it at the same location.
Odd Man Out
06-05-2014, 23:43
I started this thread over four years ago, and it keeps coming back to life. I guess I left a trace :D
I'll save you the trouble re-reading the whole thread and let you jump to my summary:
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?59222-How-Little-Trace-Do-You-Leave-Behind&p=976581&viewfull=1#post976581
hayshaker170
06-07-2014, 09:41
Just by replying to this thread I am violating LNT principles.
yerbyray
06-14-2014, 09:33
My view of LNT is fairly simple. I take my trash out as well as other people's trash. Think about it, if everyone picked up an extra pieces of litter, it would soon be all gone.
As for toilet paper, human waste, and scraps of food....it is all biodegradeable and if you want to go and examine it to track someone, go right ahead.
ChinMusic
06-14-2014, 10:45
My goal is simple. I want it to take a forensic investigstion to know I camped there last night.
squeezebox
06-14-2014, 11:29
I agree with the folks that said LNT is something to bring home with you.
My job is close enough I should walk. better yet get a cheap bicycle. etc.
I do have a big garden etc.
should compost.
It's not uncommon for people to move out of their rental, and leave a truck full of crap in the alley.
So let's keep the trail pretty, and our parks, roadsides etc.
but also try to heal our overloaded Earth.
Wise Old Owl
06-22-2014, 20:45
My goal is simple. I want it to take a forensic investigstion to know I camped there last night.
Too funny can I quote you on that!
bamboo bob
06-25-2014, 13:51
Many Non-profits exist to give the people who work there good jobs with good wages. The so called mission is just marketing. Pick a NP and the go look up the salaries. Get to lve in DC and go to parties and talk about your good works. Chicks love it.
Wife and I LNT and pick up, as much as reasonable, traces left by others, too.
Starchild
06-25-2014, 15:06
As a LNT trainer, I find the best way of explaining LNT is not the 7 principals, but the '+3', which is respect for community, wildlife and the earth. From that the 7 are derived from and they are to be taken as reasonable given the conditions and they do vary from activity to activity.
Campfires are permitted (as you asked in the OP), but the LNT aspect is to use it sustainable, don't make large fires but make them on the smaller side but enough for the purpose (cooking, light, heat or just a gathering), get wood from far away as not to strip the area of wood. etc. Use a existing fire area, or if you make one break it down after and return it back to a more natural state. Consider alternatives to a rock ring, such as using a fire pan or some other methods such as a mount fire.
likeahike
06-25-2014, 15:38
I did not leave Little Trace behind. He was with me the whole time.
rocketsocks
06-25-2014, 18:49
I was surprised to find that many hikers don't have fires in the evening, and with the exception of a trip this past Winter where a fire was built for cookin' brats, I've yet to build a fire while on hiking trips. Not sayin I won't, just haven't...to tired at the end of the day...Though it was nice to roll into camp on that cold day (20+ degrees) and see a fire going. Whatta morale booster.
ChinMusic
06-25-2014, 18:54
I was surprised to find that many hikers don't have fires in the evening, and with the exception of a trip this past Winter where a fire was built for cookin' brats, I've yet to build a fire while on hiking trips. Not sayin I won't, just haven't...to tired at the end of the day...Though it was nice to roll into camp on that cold day (20+ degrees) and see a fire going. Whatta morale booster.
I started exactly one fire on my thru. I enjoyed the fire of many others and helped with gathering wood.
rocketsocks
06-25-2014, 19:01
I started exactly one fire on my thru. I enjoyed the fire of many others and helped with gathering wood.
yup, I dragged a couple charlie brown sticks in, the place was pretty well picked through. Part of leave no trace is gathering wood from distance, so as not to remove all the local downed wood, er so I've read. Kind surprised really, thought there would be more smaller branches after the last couple hurricanes.
My view of LNT is fairly simple. I take my trash out as well as other people's trash. Think about it, if everyone picked up an extra pieces of litter, it would soon be all gone.
As for toilet paper, human waste, and scraps of food....it is all biodegradeable and if you want to go and examine it to track someone, go right ahead. LNT requires used TP to be packed out in both Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks.
"Bury human waste 6” deep and at least 100 ft. from trails, camps, and all water sources. Pack out used toilet paper."
Sequoia:
http://www.nps.gov/seki/planyourvisit/upload/WTP-pages-2-11-3.pdf
Yosemite:
http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/lnt.htm
I'll be happy when this is true everywhere. I HATE seeing other people's TP. Most of the time, I don't use TP. (I know... TMI)
VERY entertaining Backcountry Poop Clinic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwmwxkD86Ec
bangorme
06-25-2014, 19:09
I don't use TP. (I know... TMI)
Please remind me to not shake your hand when we meet. ;)
Not to worry. I'm not all touchy feely. :)
I don't like touching anybody's hands out there. TP does not guarantee that your hands will remain poo free.
Biggie Master
06-25-2014, 19:51
When I see the wildlife packing out their own excrement, then I'll know that I should pack mine out too... Until then, I'll make a proper cathole away from the trail and water sources or use a privy... You do what your conscience tells you!
rocketsocks
06-25-2014, 19:55
When I see the wildlife packing out their own excrement, then I'll know that I should pack mine out too... Until then, I'll make a proper cathole away from the trail and water sources or use a privy... You do what your conscience tells you!
well then you obviously didn't watch the video "The Tucker Method" :D (7:45)
Odd Man Out
06-25-2014, 21:18
Not to worry. I'm not all touchy feely. :)
I don't like touching anybody's hands out there. TP does not guarantee that your hands will remain poo free.
That's what I was going to point out. It's not the hands you need to avoid ;-)
Anyway I started this thread over four years ago and it keep coming back to life. It's been entertaining.
bangorme
06-26-2014, 09:14
Not to worry. I'm not all touchy feely. :)
I don't like touching anybody's hands out there. TP does not guarantee that your hands will remain poo free.
No, but using it at least shows an effort to do so. I suppose if someone assured me they were using the "good hand, bad hand" method (and they were right handed), I might think differently.
Odd Man Out
06-26-2014, 11:07
No, but using it at least shows an effort to do so. I suppose if someone assured me they were using the "good hand, bad hand" method (and they were right handed), I might think differently.
I have been told that rule in India is that the right hand is clean (for eating, etc...) and the left hand is unclean (for that other thing). Get them mixed up and you commit a social faux pas.
Sarcasm the elf
06-26-2014, 13:09
I'll be happy when this is true everywhere. I HATE seeing other people's TP. Most of the time, I don't use TP. (I know... TMI)
VERY entertaining Backcountry Poop Clinic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwmwxkD86Ec
I would tend to agree in the context of the arid climates out west where the topsoil is more fragile and decomposition is slow.
The A.T. Is a different story, most of the trail is located in temperate forests with good rainfall and a healthy layer of duff which quickly decomposes organic material that is buried in it. This sort of land can easily handle normal amounts of waste and TP so long as it is properly buried. The visible TP flowers that i typically see on the A.T. Are from people who make no attempt to step an appropriate distance off trail and no attempt to bury their waste. In those cases ignorance and lazyness is the real problem.
rocketsocks
06-26-2014, 13:24
Whata ya do in winter when the ground is frozen? I guess pack it out. I stuffed my trace under a rock.
signed
guilty of gardening
Sarcasm the elf
06-26-2014, 13:27
Whata ya do in winter when the ground is frozen? I guess pack it out. I stuffed my trace under a rock.
signed
guilty of gardening
If the ground is frozen the you put the TP into a plastic bag, carefully seal it and then sneak it into the garbage bag in your buddy's pack. What else would you do with it?
(Just don't try that if you're hiking with Laz, he'd probably notice the weight difference as soon as he picked up his pack. :D)
bangorme
06-26-2014, 13:32
... The visible TP flowers that i typically see on the A.T. Are from people who make no attempt to step an appropriate distance off trail and no attempt to bury their waste. In those cases ignorance and lazyness is the real problem.
This is true, and BTW, animals do not dig up human feces. Any toilet paper you see was not properly buried.
This is true, and BTW, animals do not dig up human feces. Any toilet paper you see was not properly buried. We had a back country ranger ask us, "What are you doing with your TP?" My sister was packing her's out. I said that I didn't use it.
Ranger told us that he used TP until one time, he went to poop and two marmots were all over him when he dropped his pants. He was a little freaked but did what he had to do. 10 seconds after he buried his poop and TP, marmots dug it all up and shredded the poopy TP into 1000 confetti sized pieces. He said that he never used TP again. :)
If you are on the PCT and a ranger pokes your backpack to confirm that you have a bear canister... you might want to douse that spot in hand sanitizer.
Oh... used TP... it goes in the bear can with your food. Ain't THAT appetizing?!?!? :p
Poo is water soluble and washes off both rear and hands perfectly with soap and water.
rocketsocks
06-26-2014, 14:44
If the ground is frozen the you put the TP into a plastic bag, carefully seal it and then sneak it into the garbage bag in your buddy's pack. What else would you do with it?
(Just don't try that if you're hiking with Laz, he'd probably notice the weight difference as soon as he picked up his pack. :D)
That would be a S***y thing to do...:D Yep, I'll start packin it out in the frozen ground winter months. :)
My view on LNT. Don't litter. Whatever you bring in, make sure you try your damn best to take back out with you. Stick to the damn path. Pick up other people's litter if possible. Bury your waste. Use common sense near water sources.
But I am new to hiking so what do I know.
bangorme
06-26-2014, 17:10
Just a point here. The LNT issue with human feces is justified by the concentration of humans using the same paths, not the ecological damage they do. Human feces are no worse than bear or coyote feces. So, if I'm bushwacking up some mountain and probably no other human has been there for the last 50 years, I don't worry about much of the stuff I do when I am hiking the AT. I've got as much right to go to the bathroom there as does any other animal.
Berserker
06-27-2014, 11:59
Poo is water soluble and washes off both rear and hands perfectly with soap and water.
So does that mean this no TP method you use is normal wiping just not using TP? I'm not normally squeamish...but if that's the case then ewwwwwww!
So does that mean this no TP method you use is normal wiping just not using TP? I'm not normally squeamish...but if that's the case then ewwwwwww! I get as much of the poo off as possible with a rock, moss, snowball, or something from the forest. Then I take a couple of drops of soap and 8-12 oz of water and wash my butt. Just pour a bottle of water with right hand and scrub with left. Then I wash my hands really good with soap and water.
I do this in privies too, when using TP, although, we really don't have many outhouses out here, except in the urban places like Point Reyes, etc. I think that a lot of people's monkey butt or chafing is really a case of diaper rash and just not using a tiny bit of soap and water after wiping one's butt with TP.
You can try it at home (using TP to get most of the poo off, not pine cones... :)) It really does make one feel squeeky clean. :)
I lived in an canvas army tent outside of Sequoia Nat'l Park with an outhouse and no running water for a year in the 70's. Had to drive to take a shower. We used this method. Nobody ever got e coli poisoning.
Mike Clelland!, way more entertaining than I, demonstrating: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwmwxkD86Ec
Liberate yourself from toilet paper: http://ultralightbackpackintips.blogspot.com/2012/09/liberate-yourself-from-toilet-paper.html
I do take some Wet Wipe for dry camps and use hand sanitizer (on hands, not butt), but I don't like it. It is harder to get clean, and there is that "TP must be packed out" issue in many areas in the state and I try very hard to plan to have 2-3 cups of water for cleaning up.
PS... it used to be acceptable to bury trash, but that is no longer the case. Someday we will feel the same about burying TP.
ChinMusic
06-27-2014, 13:11
PS... it used to be acceptable to bury trash, but that is no longer the case. Someday we will feel the same about burying TP.
Except for specific areas, not a chance.
My goal is simple. I want it to take a forensic investigstion to know I camped there last night.
ChinMusic,
If you are planning on the doing the PCT next year... There is a lot of California where LNT means packing out your used TP. I suspect that most thru hikers feel entitled to bury TP and not pack it out. You decide what you will do. However, you will be leaving forensic evidence behind with your TP. :)
Pack out TP
Mojave Desert: http://www.nps.gov/moja/planyourvisit/backpacking.htm
Sequoia Nat'l Park: http://www.nps.gov/seki/planyourvisit/upload/WTP-pages-2-11-3.pdf
Yosemite Nat'l Park: http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/wildregs.htm
Pack out TP AND poop
Anza Borrego http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/638/files/anza-borrego%20desert%20state%20park%20magazine.pdf
Mt Whitney http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5333235.pdf
Desolation Wilderness and other wilderness areas.... people are encouraged to pack out TP, however, at this time it is still legal to bury it.
PS... from PCTA website, about half of PCT thru hikers report that they plan to pack TP out or use no TP. http://www.pcta.org/2013/pct-toilet-paper-disposal-survey-14994/
I was wrong in assuming that most people are burying it or hiding it under a rock.
Going to stop Googling toilet paper now and go for a walk. :)
Pedaling Fool
06-27-2014, 15:16
PS... it used to be acceptable to bury trash, but that is no longer the case. Someday we will feel the same about burying TP.
...There is a lot of California where LNT means packing out your used TP. I suspect that most thru hikers feel entitled to bury TP and not pack it out....No, I disagree that someday it will be common practice to carry out TP; maybe a cult of people, but not common amongst hikers on the AT. This is no more an entitlement issue than pissing in the woods or even taking a dump. TP easily degrades and degrades quickly in a cathole. If someone throws it on the ground, then yes, it will take a long time, just like it takes leaves/sticks to degrade vs. the ones under the mulch, because nothing degrades without moisture. However, TP still won't last that long, one good rain will quickly tear it apart and force it under the mulch; you can't say that for the leaves, they'll still be there after a good rain, so TP does breakdown relatively fast, much faster than any leaf. Do a quick experiment, just piss on the TP and you'll see.
In another post you mentioned that marmots digged up some TP. I'm a little skeptical that animals dig up catholes as much as some claim, but I'm not doubting your story; I just don't believe it happens all that much. However, lets assume it does. They are not going after TP, if you buried plain TP (without perfumes) they wouldn't even know it was there, that means they are going after the crap, not the TP, the TP is just a coincidental uncovering and if they tear it to shreads then the quicker it will degrade.
So should everyone start packing out the crap to keep animals from digging it up?
P.S. I'm not talking about desert environments and I'm not condoning leaving TP lying out in the open...
Pedaling Fool
03-18-2016, 09:47
The attached video is from Indonesia, but it could easily be anywhere in the world.
Here's the trace we all leave behind. Interesting thing he's doing.
This is why I'm against freezer bag cooking.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/indonesian-man-turns-plastic-waste-101820722.html?nf=1
saltysack
03-18-2016, 10:28
The attached video is from Indonesia, but it could easily be anywhere in the world.
Here's the trace we all leave behind. Interesting thing he's doing.
This is why I'm against freezer bag cooking.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/indonesian-man-turns-plastic-waste-101820722.html?nf=1
Howdy neighbor....
Agree with you 100%.....the plastic revelation makes me sick!!!! Until they make it all safely degradable it should be limited or banned! I cringe if I go to the Wally World...just watch all the damn bags they use...I don't understand why anyone needs a bag for 1-2 items...I get the strangest looks when I tell the clerk no BAGS!! Yea my wife uses reusable bags but I never remember them so I do without a bag or if it's allot of stuff I'll cram it into one paper bag that I'll use as fire starter.....most people just don't give a ship!!! There's nothing worse than being in a remote natural area and seeing signs of mans waste! Whether it be scuba diving 50 miles offshore, paddling the Everglades or hiking in the mountains! Call me a tree hugger......I guess I care too much as it truly depresses me!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MuddyWaters
03-18-2016, 11:17
Im currently working in the middle east. They use plastic sheeting in the ground to retain precious water for crops. Without the plastic and goat/sheep manure, they couldnt grow anything in the sand. The plastic degrades of course, and falls to pieces. The dirt has plastic mixed in, and countryside and villages are covered with plastic trash, everywhere. No such thing as recycling, or even trash pickup. Its pretty nasty really. Puts things in perpective.
I don't make fire rings. Fires only where there's an established, well-used fire ring. I bury my poo and TP per recommended procedures, well off the trail and nowhere near water. I use trekking poles totally without guilt. I'm not averse to stealth camping and make a point of covering up my traces, eg. if I've cleared a few branches to pitch my tent, I'll put them back more or less as I found them. I don't "engineer" my campsite, I'm just there to eat a meal, sleep, and move on the next morning. When I wash my camp dishes I only use a few oz. of water, and broadcast that into the woods or scrub, well away from the shelter or campsite. I'm more than happy to use shelters and official campsites if they fit my schedule, if they're empty, or if I like the scene I find there, etc. And just as likely to camp in the woods if not.
Odd Man Out
03-18-2016, 12:01
Welcome back to my little thread that comes to life every year or so :sun
Interesting slant on the issue. Does you desire to LNT apply to the environmental impact you make due to your gear choices and hiking style? On the whole, backpacking is one of the least resource intensive pastimes there is, so in general I don't feel too guilty. The environmental impact of hiking is pretty minimal so I generally do not apply LTN to impact outside of my immediate actions on the trail.
One problem is that we are not always very good at accurately assessing environmental impact. I know some people choose to use alcohol stoves over canister since you aren't producing waste canisters and the fuel is a renewable resource. But when you take into account the resources used to produce the ethanol, the answer isn't as clear. (NOTE: It is not my intent to start an alcohol vs canister which is more environmental friendly debate). We may feel better about picking paper over plastic at the grocery store, but the paper industry has historically had a lot of environmental impact (WRT energy consumption and pollution production). As with ethanol, the fact that paper comes from a renewable resource (trees) isn't the whole story.
That being said, I too have not gone to FBC as I don't want to generate the waste. On the other hand, all of my meals are packaged in some type of plastic bag. But if not used for cooking, they can be reused. Do I reuse them? Probably not as much as I should. But I do like repurposing items. My water bottles are old Gatorade bottles, my clothes bag is a plastic grocery bag, and my stove is made from a V8 Juice can. The garbage dumpster can be a fine source of first class backpacking gear.
I too get annoyed when they put two items in a plastic bag at the grocery store. When I say "no bag", I get weird looks. I have two hand - I bought two items - Why is this so hard to figure out??
One of my biggest concerns is the CO2 I generate driving to and from hikes. I always strive for best ratio of hiking time to driving time, and if that ratio gets low, try to mitigate it with a fellow passenger/hiker. Also: hike locally.
Pedaling Fool
03-18-2016, 13:49
Welcome back to my little thread that comes to life every year or so :sun
Interesting slant on the issue. Does you desire to LNT apply to the environmental impact you make due to your gear choices and hiking style? On the whole, backpacking is one of the least resource intensive pastimes there is, so in general I don't feel too guilty. The environmental impact of hiking is pretty minimal so I generally do not apply LTN to impact outside of my immediate actions on the trail.
One problem is that we are not always very good at accurately assessing environmental impact. I know some people choose to use alcohol stoves over canister since you aren't producing waste canisters and the fuel is a renewable resource. But when you take into account the resources used to produce the ethanol, the answer isn't as clear. (NOTE: It is not my intent to start an alcohol vs canister which is more environmental friendly debate). We may feel better about picking paper over plastic at the grocery store, but the paper industry has historically had a lot of environmental impact (WRT energy consumption and pollution production). As with ethanol, the fact that paper comes from a renewable resource (trees) isn't the whole story.
That being said, I too have not gone to FBC as I don't want to generate the waste. On the other hand, all of my meals are packaged in some type of plastic bag. But if not used for cooking, they can be reused. Do I reuse them? Probably not as much as I should. But I do like repurposing items. My water bottles are old Gatorade bottles, my clothes bag is a plastic grocery bag, and my stove is made from a V8 Juice can. The garbage dumpster can be a fine source of first class backpacking gear.
I too get annoyed when they put two items in a plastic bag at the grocery store. When I say "no bag", I get weird looks. I have two hand - I bought two items - Why is this so hard to figure out??
All very good points OMO and it's very true that there are no easy answers. For the record I'm not anti-plastic, plastics are really a great invention. I'm simply of the mind that we really should be more conscious in the massive use of this product. Not only do I forgo FBC because of this issue, but I also re-use tons of plastic bags (ziplocks), I still have some from my 2006 hike:) I also tell the store clerks I don't want the plastic bags, but at the same time it's not a viable solution to replace all these bags with paper, nor with recyclable plastics.
Even the simplest of problems become massively complex when the scale of the problem is as large as this issue.
I also tell the store clerks I don't want the plastic bags, but at the same time it's not a viable solution to replace all these bags with paper, nor with recyclable plastics.
Reusable bags. Not really a new concept. The only problem is remembering to bring them.
jbmundy87
03-18-2016, 15:16
I get as much of the poo off as possible with a rock, moss, snowball, or something from the forest. Then I take a couple of drops of soap and 8-12 oz of water and wash my butt. Just pour a bottle of water with right hand and scrub with left. Then I wash my hands really good with soap and water.
Then what do you do with the rock, moss, snowball? I have read the Clelland article about it and it seems scraping your butt on tufts of grass just leaves human waste spread around. If a thousand thru hikers did that at every shelter it would be pretty bad. But I do like that idea of not carrying TP. Seriously Curious.
Sarcasm the elf
03-18-2016, 15:20
Reusable bags. Not really a new concept. The only problem is remembering to bring them.
The second problem with reusable bags is remembering to clean them. Supposedly there has been a small but noticeable increase in gastroenteritis in areas where using reusable bags is very popular. The outbreak has been linked to bacteria harbored in the bags :eek:
The second problem with reusable bags is remembering to clean them. Supposedly there has been a small but noticeable increase in gastroenteritis in areas where using reusable bags is very popular. The outbreak has been linked to bacteria harbored in the bags :eek:
Hmm, I wouldn't have thought of that. I certainly don't detect odors on ours, nor spills. Most food is heavily packaged, and even most fruits and veggies in their own bags (can't get completely away from them.) Plastic groc bags are re-used as liners for small wastebaskets. Paper groc bags for the paper recyclables (eg. reams of junk mail and paper packaging.) And every now and then, excess plastic groc bags returned to the store for recycling.
nsherry61
03-18-2016, 16:16
Then what do you do with the rock, moss, snowball? I have read the Clelland article about it and it seems scraping your butt on tufts of grass just leaves human waste spread around. . . But I do like that idea of not carrying TP. Seriously Curious.
Solution is simple. Ignored Clelland's advice, and don't scrape your poor butt with anything other than your finger. Then wash up with soap when you're done like the 80% of the world that doesn't use toilet paper at all and does just fine.
CamelMan
03-18-2016, 16:26
The attached video is from Indonesia, but it could easily be anywhere in the world.
Here's the trace we all leave behind. Interesting thing he's doing.
This is why I'm against freezer bag cooking.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/indonesian-man-turns-plastic-waste-101820722.html?nf=1
This might sound like a good idea but what this guy is doing is releasing the CO2 and other waste products into the air, when other people are talking about trying to recapture and bury them. If plastic can't be recycled into more plastic containers, then it would probably be environmentally better to grind it up, rebury it, let it become part of the soil until it degrades 10,000 years from now, and quit making more.
My hero:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/07/eco.ed.begley/
This actor lives a LNT lifestyle when he's out in nature and as much as possible when home. He's the model recycler for America (and beyond our borders). He personally generates something like less than a pound of non-biodegradable trash a year.
Harrison Bergeron
03-18-2016, 20:40
As much as it bothers me to hike through the toilet paper blooms emerging from a privy-less "LNT" camp ground or to find some idiot's half-melted soda bottle in a fire ring, I worry more about the wild places where hikers truly leave no trace ever -- they tend to become subdivisions and clear-cut wastelands.
Nearly all of East Texas once contained no trace of human habitation -- until the logging industry discovered it. 100 years later, it's finally starting to recover, largely because people now traipse through it often enough to care about preserving it. The old logging railroad bed is now known as the Lone Star Trail. But when you see it from the air, it still looks like a giant field of perfectly spaced corn stalks, and when you hike through it, you're more likely to see another human being than any sort of wildlife -- even mice, birds, or squirrels.
I'd much rather have a poorly loved wilderness than an unloved one.
Odd Man Out
03-18-2016, 22:48
Reusable bags. Not really a new concept. The only problem is remembering to bring them.
True that. I have a pile of them in the back seat that never seem to make into the store.
Traveler
03-19-2016, 05:44
There are communities in the US that have banned the ubiquitous plastic bags. Seems a good practice and more likely to get manufacturers to hasten improvements to biodegradable bags than not doing anything.
The state of Hawaii has banned all plastic shopping bags. Businesses here that still supply bags use paper or a thick mil plastic.
illabelle
03-19-2016, 07:09
As much as it bothers me to hike through the toilet paper blooms emerging from a privy-less "LNT" camp ground or to find some idiot's half-melted soda bottle in a fire ring, I worry more about the wild places where hikers truly leave no trace ever -- they tend to become subdivisions and clear-cut wastelands.
Nearly all of East Texas once contained no trace of human habitation -- until the logging industry discovered it. 100 years later, it's finally starting to recover, largely because people now traipse through it often enough to care about preserving it. The old logging railroad bed is now known as the Lone Star Trail. But when you see it from the air, it still looks like a giant field of perfectly spaced corn stalks, and when you hike through it, you're more likely to see another human being than any sort of wildlife -- even mice, birds, or squirrels.
I'd much rather have a poorly loved wilderness than an unloved one.
Good observations. Agree completely.
There are communities in the US that have banned the ubiquitous plastic bags. Seems a good practice and more likely to get manufacturers to hasten improvements to biodegradable bags than not doing anything.
Here in Massachusetts, Brookline, MA has banned them, along with styrofoam take-out cups (there are a few exceptions that businesses managed to work into the policy). Cambridge, MA will soon be banning grocery bags. I live in a city just north of Boston that is about 50 years behind the times in terms of protecting the environment, alas. The Mayor won't even allow my city to be connected to the bike path that rings Greater Boston - we are the sole North Shore gap (although there is an unofficial rail-trail here that can be followed).
I think it was the female Cranky here who said she picks them up of the street for proper disposal/recycling. Many supermarkets she noted will do this, but, like her, I only trust Whole Foods to actually recycle the things. Surely students in the sciences must be working on this. I hope so.
Plastic or paper? I am among those who often forget my reusable bags, so I have taken to folding them up and placing them in my handbag (yes, I am among those women who carry oversized purses), no matter what the occasion, formal or informal.
Grocery bags are a menace everywhere, but on one side of my city is the Atlantic Ocean, on the other side is one of our state's largest public parks, really a small forest. In between it's mostly an asphalt city with few green spaces. But surrounded by eco-sensitive areas (ocean; woods) makes many of us particularly aware of plastics.
The state of Hawaii has banned all plastic shopping bags. Businesses here that still supply bags use paper or a thick mil plastic.
Exceptions are always being written into policy. I worry that sea life will be affected (whales as others have noted ingest plastic bags thinking they are squid and other seafood; then they get sick from lack of nutrition). Does President Obama's Pacific Marine Sanctuary have anything to do with the reduction of plastics in the business (retail) community?
Hmm, I wouldn't have thought of that. I certainly don't detect odors on ours, nor spills. Most food is heavily packaged, and even most fruits and veggies in their own bags (can't get completely away from them.) Plastic groc bags are re-used as liners for small wastebaskets. Paper groc bags for the paper recyclables (eg. reams of junk mail and paper packaging.) And every now and then, excess plastic groc bags returned to the store for recycling.If you are putting meat into a reusable grocery bag think about this: how difficult do you think it is to package meat without touching the outside of the package? So whatever small amount of juice touches the outside of the package of meat is getting rubbed onto the inside of the grocery bag. Listeria and salmonella are probably transferred in this way.
saltysack
03-19-2016, 10:09
If you are putting meat into a reusable grocery bag think about this: how difficult do you think it is to package meat without touching the outside of the package? So whatever small amount of juice touches the outside of the package of meat is getting rubbed onto the inside of the grocery bag. Listeria and salmonella are probably transferred in this way.
Yep...raw meat still goes in plastic bag but I wash wife's bags every few weeks...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TexasBob
03-19-2016, 16:16
There are communities in the US that have banned the ubiquitous plastic bags. Seems a good practice and more likely to get manufacturers to hasten improvements to biodegradable bags than not doing anything.
I was in a grocery store in California and could not find a hand basket to shop with. I asked a clerk about it and he said that people were stealing them from the store to carry their groceries to their car since plastic grocery bags had been outlawed there.
saltysack
03-19-2016, 17:49
Yep people steal anything that's not tied down....shopping carts included!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
middle to middle
03-19-2016, 18:01
Now that is funny !
CamelMan
03-19-2016, 20:40
Yep people steal anything that's not tied down....shopping carts included!
And then fix them and sell them back to the store?
Traveler
03-20-2016, 06:52
I was in a grocery store in California and could not find a hand basket to shop with. I asked a clerk about it and he said that people were stealing them from the store to carry their groceries to their car since plastic grocery bags had been outlawed there.
Grocery stores I've been to in CA sell reusable grocery bags near the registers. I see a lot of folks using those, but you can get paper bags at $0.10 per bag as well. Much like I see in other states, stores employ people to round up the shopping carts and baskets people take into the parking lot and there are people who round up errant carts (and other things like milk crates for Dairys') and return them either as a part time job or for a bounty. I've often wondered if there could be a bounty for plastic bags that can be measured somehow, much as deposit bottles work.
Pedaling Fool
03-20-2016, 07:23
Stealing shopping carts must be a regional/local phenomenon. Doesn't seem to be a problem here, but when I go home to Maryland (D.C. is just across the river -- and beltway), it's very common to see shopping carts everywhere, especially in ditches. I noticed this also when I would go to many NE towns while traveling for the navy doing jobs. A lot of depressing places.
I was in a grocery store in California and could not find a hand basket to shop with. I asked a clerk about it and he said that people were stealing them from the store to carry their groceries to their car since plastic grocery bags had been outlawed there.
Also, the rollie ones with the long handles are popular theft items, as people use them in place of those little collapsable shopping carts.
Stealing shopping carts must be a regional/local phenomenon. Doesn't seem to be a problem here, but when I go home to Maryland (D.C. is just across the river -- and beltway), it's very common to see shopping carts everywhere, especially in ditches. I noticed this also when I would go to many NE towns while traveling for the navy doing jobs. A lot of depressing places.
Another environmental menace.
There's a photo book about shopping carts being in places shopping carts should never be.
If you are putting meat into a reusable grocery bag think about this: how difficult do you think it is to package meat without touching the outside of the package? So whatever small amount of juice touches the outside of the package of meat is getting rubbed onto the inside of the grocery bag. Listeria and salmonella are probably transferred in this way.
Bring your own clean Tupperware (or something like it) or the meat and deli departments. That's what I do. Then again, I'm obsessed with these matters.:D
saltysack
03-20-2016, 12:34
Bring your own clean Tupperware (or something like it) or the meat and deli departments. That's what I do. Then again, I'm obsessed with these matters.:D
Good idea but it's hard enough to remember the dam bags!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mouser999
03-20-2016, 13:09
We found a trace of someone's dog left on the summit of Bear Mountain CT yesterday. Luckily it was bagged. Right by our lunch spot. Another dog owner offered to bring it down the mountain.
saltysack
03-20-2016, 13:38
We found a trace of someone's dog left on the summit of Bear Mountain CT yesterday. Luckily it was bagged. Right by our lunch spot. Another dog owner offered to bring it down the mountain.
Idiots....just bury your dogs crap in the woods...bagging just creates more non degradable trash!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
saltysack
03-20-2016, 13:39
Idiots....just bury your dogs crap in the woods...bagging just creates more non degradable trash!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bk not referring to u but the moron who left it behind...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Odd Man Out
03-20-2016, 21:33
Grocery stores I've been to in CA sell reusable grocery bags near the registers. I see a lot of folks using those, but you can get paper bags at $0.10 per bag as well.
Unfortunately this is backwards. You should have to pay more for the plastic bag than the reusable one.
In this country, we pay for the cost of producing something but no one is held financially responsible for the cost of disposal or environmental impact. Since plastic bags cost next to nothing to produce, that is the only cost we consider. In contrast, hazardous waste (toxic chemical, for example) is regulated under a “cradle to grave” concept, meaning that the waste is tracked from the time it becomes a waste. Ownership and responsibility for disposal and cleanup of the the waste remains with the generator forever. As a result, it is in the best financial interest of companies to operate their businesses is such a way as to minimize the production of hazardous waste. Typically, renewable and reusable resources can not compete with the cost of disposable resources. But if you were held financially responsible for the cost of the environmental impact, then renewable and reusable resources would become much more cost competitive.
saltysack
03-20-2016, 23:01
Unfortunately this is backwards. You should have to pay more for the plastic bag than the reusable one.
In this country, we pay for the cost of producing something but no one is held financially responsible for the cost of disposal or environmental impact. Since plastic bags cost next to nothing to produce, that is the only cost we consider. In contrast, hazardous waste (toxic chemical, for example) is regulated under a “cradle to grave” concept, meaning that the waste is tracked from the time it becomes a waste. Ownership and responsibility for disposal and cleanup of the the waste remains with the generator forever. As a result, it is in the best financial interest of companies to operate their businesses is such a way as to minimize the production of hazardous waste. Typically, renewable and reusable resources can not compete with the cost of disposable resources. But if you were held financially responsible for the cost of the environmental impact, then renewable and reusable resources would become much more cost competitive.
So true!!! Spot on!!! If stores were required to charge a premium for supplying this garbage more folks would pay attention....I believe target gives a small discount per bag you provide. Trader joes also rewards reusable bags....I'm sure there are others but until it is federally mandated no real progress will be made IMO....most people don't give a ship!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Puddlefish
03-21-2016, 09:14
At the risk of getting into a giant fight. Reusable bags are not automatically better for the environment. Consider manufacturing energy, may also be made of plastic, might be shipped across the globe on a leaky giant containership, will require water resources to clean, consider if you're using some sort of detergent from a plastic bottle and paper towels to clean them, consider the health costs if you don't clean them properly, final disposal is probably in a landfill, or at best downcycled. They aren't necessarily worse either. Use your re-usable bag 200 times, and it might come out ahead. Re-use your cheap plastic bag 5 times and it might come out ahead.
I'm not a hippie, but I'm environmentally aware and pragmatic. I don't exactly do my best, but at least I'm aware and avoid the obvious mistakes. I live simply, with probably less of an overall carbon footprint than many of the people giving me dirty looks for using plastic bags are. (*as they carry their re-usable bags to their smart car, drive home park the smart car next to their big SUV in the driveway of their 5,000 square foot summer "cottage" surrounded by an acre of lawn, with the concrete retaining wall extending into the lake.)
Do the best you can on your hike, try not to judge others too much, who do things a bit differently. Leave the trail tidy, not so much to save the planet, but out of courtesy for the others you share it with.
*This is a fairly common scenario in my obscenely rich little town.
I don't see the percentage in reusable grocery bags if you're just going to buy plastic trash bags. I don't buy trash bags, I use the grocery bags I get for free.
Harrison Bergeron
03-22-2016, 11:26
I lament the plight of my great-grandchildren. Some day the oil will run out and our garbage dumps will become their plastic mines. I feel a duty to future generations to make sure there is plenty of highly-compressible and valuable plastic in the landfills -- rather of just a pile of bulky and worthless paper pulp, rotting and gassing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere!
Traveler
03-22-2016, 11:35
Unfortunately this is backwards. You should have to pay more for the plastic bag than the reusable one.
In this country, we pay for the cost of producing something but no one is held financially responsible for the cost of disposal or environmental impact. Since plastic bags cost next to nothing to produce, that is the only cost we consider. In contrast, hazardous waste (toxic chemical, for example) is regulated under a “cradle to grave” concept, meaning that the waste is tracked from the time it becomes a waste. Ownership and responsibility for disposal and cleanup of the the waste remains with the generator forever. As a result, it is in the best financial interest of companies to operate their businesses is such a way as to minimize the production of hazardous waste. Typically, renewable and reusable resources can not compete with the cost of disposable resources. But if you were held financially responsible for the cost of the environmental impact, then renewable and reusable resources would become much more cost competitive.
Plastic bags are banned in some places now, so the choice is carry stuff in your pockets, buy a reusable bag, or pay $0.10 (perhaps more now) for paper. When plastic bags aren't an option, those are the choices.
saltysack
03-22-2016, 11:44
Plastic bags are banned in some places now, so the choice is carry stuff in your pockets, buy a reusable bag, or pay $0.10 (perhaps more now) for paper. When plastic bags aren't an option, those are the choices.
I wish this was across the board.......not just a few places......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Traveler
03-23-2016, 07:31
I wish this was across the board.......not just a few places......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very much agreed! Its really disheartening when you are walking through the forest in late fall, miles from the road and there is a plastic bag stuck in a tree 30' in the air rattling in the wind.
Plastic bags are banned in some places now, so the choice is carry stuff in your pockets, buy a reusable bag, or pay $0.10 (perhaps more now) for paper. When plastic bags aren't an option, those are the choices.
And then there are the trees. I hope many of us are prepared (as I am) to lobby our merchants to used recycled paper bags. Going up against merchant associations can sometimes be a losing proposition, as the recent defeat of the new bottle bill in Massachusetts showed (outside money; fear-mongering).
Pedaling Fool
03-23-2016, 08:25
And then there are the trees. I hope many of us are prepared (as I am) to lobby our merchants to used recycled paper bags. Going up against merchant associations can sometimes be a losing proposition, as the recent defeat of the new bottle bill in Massachusetts showed (outside money; fear-mongering).
I'm not sure of your point: "And then there are the trees." What's that mean?
The trees are why it's not feasible to replace these plastic bags with paper. Then you got the water issue, it takes much more water to produce a paper bag vs. a plastic bag.
The use of plastics on such a grand scale is a problem, but the fix isn't as easy as it seems, even bio-degradable plastics have issues, especially land use issues. If every town in America banned plastic bags we'd have many problems, such as increased water use and fossil fuel use, so for places like San Fran to ban bags isn't really anything more than kabuki theater
I suggest reading up on this issue, some things to start with...
http://www.letstalkplastics.com/facts/plastic-bags-versus-paper-bags
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2007/11/paper_or_plastic_or_neither.html
rocketsocks
03-23-2016, 08:45
My sundy best is a jute flour bag shirt...little itchy though, but wicks like a busted judge.
Traveler
03-23-2016, 08:53
My sundy best is a jute flour bag shirt...little itchy though, but wicks like a busted judge.
You've beaucoup class, a perfect shirt for the hell-fire-and-brimstone sermon.
rocketsocks
03-23-2016, 09:09
You've beaucoup class, a perfect shirt for the hell-fire-and-brimstone sermon.
Even they wouldn't have me.
Traveler
03-23-2016, 11:23
Even they wouldn't have me.
Not sure I would want to belong to a group that would either!
Odd Man Out
03-23-2016, 11:54
"I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member."
Groucho Marx
Pedaling,
My point? I worry like crazy about the trees. Not all paper products are made of 100 post-consumer content. So Imma gonna stick with my worn out reusable totes, not ideal, but until others come up with better ways, neither paper not grocery bags (which are getting thinner and more breakable) for me,
I love trees. But I like Kleenex, paper towels and toilet paper too. And I live in a house made mostly of wood, and I love wooden furniture -- maple, oak, ash, heck even pine. When I was young we even made stuff out of black walnut. Still, I wonder what the woods in America must have looked like before Europeans arrived. Vastly different, I assume.
I love trees. But I like Kleenex, paper towels and toilet paper too. And I live in a house made mostly of wood, and I love wooden furniture -- maple, oak, ash, heck even pine. When I was young we even made stuff out of black walnut. Still, I wonder what the woods in America must have looked like before Europeans arrived. Vastly different, I assume.
Not just us, alas. Most of England was deforested by the late middle ages. And then there is our own poor Cape Cod. Magnificent dunes born out of shipbuilders' mowing down all the forests. Hawking says the next 100 years are crucial for our planet; others are now saying the next few decades (NYT article yesterday).
I too love those things that you love (but will no longer purchase teak furniture, designed in Scandinavia, trees from southeast Asia since I learned elephants are being used as slaves to haul the trees).
Traveler
03-23-2016, 13:23
I love trees. But I like Kleenex, paper towels and toilet paper too. And I live in a house made mostly of wood, and I love wooden furniture -- maple, oak, ash, heck even pine. When I was young we even made stuff out of black walnut. Still, I wonder what the woods in America must have looked like before Europeans arrived. Vastly different, I assume.
Vastly. Chestnuts alone were a huge percentage of the forest canopy, now we only have old photos to show us what they were like. Fortunately conservation efforts have provided some stabilization of threatened forest species around the US and a few pockets of old growth that remain.
Puddlefish
03-23-2016, 13:30
I love trees. But I like Kleenex, paper towels and toilet paper too. And I live in a house made mostly of wood, and I love wooden furniture -- maple, oak, ash, heck even pine. When I was young we even made stuff out of black walnut. Still, I wonder what the woods in America must have looked like before Europeans arrived. Vastly different, I assume.
It's not the same, but it's not all that much different in New England. Consider as you're walking through a forest in New England and see a rock wall. Chances are the trees around you were clear cut at the time that wall was built. They've largely grown back in just 150 years. A lot of the new tree diversity is dependent on the soil type.
I'm in no way not advocating responsible forest management, because there are a few spots that haven't grown back when the topsoil was washed away. I think we're in a pretty decent place currently, balancing our needs and nature, largely due to a lot of work of the last generation or so of naturalist advocates.
Odd Man Out
03-23-2016, 14:31
Vastly. Chestnuts alone were a huge percentage of the forest canopy, now we only have old photos to show us what they were like. Fortunately conservation efforts have provided some stabilization of threatened forest species around the US and a few pockets of old growth that remain.
There is an interesting dilemma now being debated wrt the chestnut trees. Scientists have bred a blight resistant tree by crossing the American chestnut with a Chinese chestnut. Then by backcrossing with American chestnuts and selecting for the ones that retain the resistance gene, you get a tree that is 75% American chestnut. Each time you repeat, the Chinese chestnut tree genes are diluted by half, to the point after several generations they have resistant American chestnut trees that are genetically >95% "pure". There are those who want to repopulate the forests with these resistant trees to reestablish the original ecosystem.
http://www.acf.org/index.php
However they have also found that a single gene is responsible for the resistance and have made a resistant transgenic American chestnut tree that would be 99.99999% genetically pure. There are those who think this would be a better option as the product is essentially identical to the original tree, except the one gene that confers resistance. However those who are opposed to GMO and object to this tree even though it is much more similar to the original than the one generated by traditional genetics).
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-genetically-american-chestnut-decimated-iconic.html
Then there are those who want to use naturally occurring resistant American Chestnuts to revitalize the species.
http://www.accf-online.org/accf1.htm
What to do???
Harrison Bergeron
03-24-2016, 15:52
Genetically modified Chestnut trees introduced into the environment? Hell yes!
We're not going to save the environment by going backward. The fact is, there are more trees in North America now than when the Declaration was signed. Why? Because we're so much more efficient in how we use our resources today than we were 230 years ago. You realize, those New England forests the AT snakes through used to be farm fields! There is a reason most polluted places on Earth are inevitably the most technologically backward.
Paper vs. plastic is a classic example. Plastic is a stable, nearly indestructible form of carbon that we make by recycling a waste product of organic processes (petroleum). It's almost infinitely recyclable, and if not recycled, it's nearly infinitely compressible in a landfill, where it produces no harmful decomposition gases. And yet, your average "environmentalist" would have us go back to mowing down square miles of pine trees to make paper bags that release their carbon in the worst possible way -- methane -- when decomposing in a landfill. And why are paper bags preferred? Because they're more "natural".
I'm a REAL nature lover. That's why I long for the day when we can grow chicken breasts in a vat, so we don't have to torture a chicken brains to get them. I want a house made from that worthless black goo pumped from 5 miles under ground, so we don't have to mow down the forests that grow where I like to walk. I want power beamed from solar satellites in space so we don't have to burn that same valuable black goo down here I live. And I want that flying car and 12 hour work week they promised me, so I don't have to spend 3 hours a day waiting in line on a freeway, just so I can spend 8 hours in a cage.
In short, I want the future I was promised as a child, before the "environmentalists" decided that saving the environment was synonymous with living in the 19th century.
rocketsocks
03-24-2016, 20:50
The Emerald Ash borer is causing a big mess in many states. Just looked at an email today that asks for volunteers to go into certain areas and catalog damage for the state, here in NJ
In short, I want the future I was promised as a child, before the "environmentalists" decided that saving the environment was synonymous with living in the 19th century.
Environmentalists are responsible for the three hours a day you spend on the freeway? Seriously?
Slo-go'en
03-24-2016, 22:14
I kind of wish they would go back to making paper here instead of burning the wood to make electricity as they do now, just to keep the loggers busy.
The forests of NH and Maine have been cut down and have regrown many times and the process continues today. The "junk wood" trees which paper is made out of grows like weeds around here.
CamelMan
03-24-2016, 22:22
And yet, your average "environmentalist" would have us go back to mowing down square miles of pine trees to make paper bags that release their carbon in the worst possible way -- methane -- when decomposing in a landfill. And why are paper bags preferred? Because they're more "natural".
Paper (celllulose) is a renewable resource. The only reason trees would be cut down is because paper companies are too heavily invested in forest land or are able to lease cuts from public lands very cheaply compared to having to grow your own hemp or bamboo, which is probably what they would do if they had to.
If you can get people and companies to recycle plastic, then why not paper? At least the cellulose will naturally degrade while plastic is an eyesore and a danger to wildlife, and the only word for that South Pacific gyre full of plastic is "abomination". I'm skeptical that decomposing paper releases more carbon than the plants absorb as they grow. Otherwise, why would planting trees work as a carbon sink? They'll live a long time, but not forever.
(I'm not against plastic for some uses but it has to be recycled. There's no way to do it except making producers responsible for the whole product life cycle, which I've read they're trying to do in Europe, or else making the resource itself expensive enough to make it worthwhile, i.e. eliminating the "externality". Otherwise nobody is going to recycle paper or plastic or develop worthwhile alternative sources, except to market recycled products to people willing to pay a premium for them.)
saltysack
03-24-2016, 23:37
Genetically modified Chestnut trees introduced into the environment? Hell yes!
We're not going to save the environment by going backward. The fact is, there are more trees in North America now than when the Declaration was signed. Why? Because we're so much more efficient in how we use our resources today than we were 230 years ago. You realize, those New England forests the AT snakes through used to be farm fields! There is a reason most polluted places on Earth are inevitably the most technologically backward.
Paper vs. plastic is a classic example. Plastic is a stable, nearly indestructible form of carbon that we make by recycling a waste product of organic processes (petroleum). It's almost infinitely recyclable, and if not recycled, it's nearly infinitely compressible in a landfill, where it produces no harmful decomposition gases. And yet, your average "environmentalist" would have us go back to mowing down square miles of pine trees to make paper bags that release their carbon in the worst possible way -- methane -- when decomposing in a landfill. And why are paper bags preferred? Because they're more "natural".
I'm a REAL nature lover. That's why I long for the day when we can grow chicken breasts in a vat, so we don't have to torture a chicken brains to get them. I want a house made from that worthless black goo pumped from 5 miles under ground, so we don't have to mow down the forests that grow where I like to walk. I want power beamed from solar satellites in space so we don't have to burn that same valuable black goo down here I live. And I want that flying car and 12 hour work week they promised me, so I don't have to spend 3 hours a day waiting in line on a freeway, just so I can spend 8 hours in a cage.
In short, I want the future I was promised as a child, before the "environmentalists" decided that saving the environment was synonymous with living in the 19th century.
One word sums it up......Texas.....opinions are like A$$holes we all have one[emoji16].......my biggest problem with plastic as it doesn't degrade...how often you see paper bags floating in the ocean for years on end? You don't.....I volunteer for a wildlife rehabilitation center and can tell you first hand how bad it is for wildlife...I agree paper isn't the sole answer but we must keep progressing toward a more sustainable future.....if you love hiking and the outdoors you should consider yourself an "Environmentalist"....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
if you love hiking and the outdoors you should consider yourself an "Environmentalist"....
Amen to that.
Traillium
03-25-2016, 08:03
Amen to that.
A1+ added!
It seems wherever I walk / hike i am always picking up garbage, weather it be water bottles, paper etc. seems to me the right thing to do. So I leave as little trace as I can + some!
RUNT ''13''
Harrison Bergeron
03-25-2016, 17:52
A1+ added!
AA11++ to that.
But there are different kinds of "environmentalists". One type thinks we can solve the problem with conservation, education, and cooersion. It's sort of like setting out to hike 2150 miles through the woods with no food in your pack because you plan to just talk people into feeding in you -- but in case you encounter resistance, you've got a gun.
I'm the other kind of environmentalist. I don't think technology is the problem, I think it's the solution. And I can point to actual evidence that I'm right. Not only is 2016 Los Angeles a cleaner environment than 2016 Calcutta, but 1816 London -- coal smoke and all -- was a cleaner and healthier place to live than Shakespeare's 1616 London.
I think the best way to quit mowing down forests, torturing animals, and burning carbon is to pass through this phase of our development as quickly as possible. The day that we don't need to do those things in order to feed ourselves is just over the next hill, if we can only keep our eyes on the prize.
Pedaling Fool
03-26-2016, 08:24
AA11++ to that.
But there are different kinds of "environmentalists". One type thinks we can solve the problem with conservation, education, and cooersion. It's sort of like setting out to hike 2150 miles through the woods with no food in your pack because you plan to just talk people into feeding in you -- but in case you encounter resistance, you've got a gun.
I'm the other kind of environmentalist. I don't think technology is the problem, I think it's the solution. And I can point to actual evidence that I'm right. Not only is 2016 Los Angeles a cleaner environment than 2016 Calcutta, but 1816 London -- coal smoke and all -- was a cleaner and healthier place to live than Shakespeare's 1616 London.
I think the best way to quit mowing down forests, torturing animals, and burning carbon is to pass through this phase of our development as quickly as possible. The day that we don't need to do those things in order to feed ourselves is just over the next hill, if we can only keep our eyes on the prize.
When posting what you've posted here, a few words come to mind: Sacrilege, Heresy, Blasphemy, Apostasy, Excommunication....:D
But I do believe you speak many truths:)
Pedaling Fool
03-26-2016, 11:44
A very interesting (and informative) article on recycling. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/recycling-you-may-be-doing-it-wrong-180951192/?no-ist
Excerpt:
You couldn’t recycle a pizza box even if you wanted to.
Though they often display recycling symbols and cardboard itself is recyclable, pizza boxes are often not accepted in local pick-up programs. Why? It all comes down to the grease. The food and grease that accumulates on the box makes the paper product unrecyclable—that is unless you can remove the pizza remnants from the box. With grease, that’s pretty much impossible.
This problem isn’t unique to pizza boxes, though. Most food containers (http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/clean-food-containers-recycling) run into a similar issue, whether it’s a smoothie bottle or a take-out carrier. Recycled items don’t have to be pristinely clean, and food residue can render recycled materials less valuable. More than metal or plastic, paper absorbs oil and residue from food, so it’s harder to get out. Beyond pizza boxes, paper napkins, plates, and towels are all non-recyclable for this reason.
Just because you can’t recycle them, doesn’t mean you can’t compost them. Paper napkins and towels can go in the compost bin. “Soiled paper contains short fibers, which microorganisms in compost love, and soiled paper absorbs moisture in compost collection bins, which helps control odor,” says Reed.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/recycling-you-may-be-doing-it-wrong-180951192/#o0Pg1R9md7ssQI93.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
I've been building Hugelkultur beds ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkx2JFO0Dhw )all over my yard for over a year now, and thanks to this article I'm thinking of using paper/cardboard to make "logs" and then bury as "logs", especially pizza boxes.
.
CamelMan
03-26-2016, 18:12
Well, time to quit recycling I guess.
rocketsocks
03-26-2016, 19:29
A very interesting (and informative) article on recycling. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/recycling-you-may-be-doing-it-wrong-180951192/?no-ist
Excerpt:
I've been building Hugelkultur beds ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkx2JFO0Dhw )all over my yard for over a year now, and thanks to this article I'm thinking of using paper/cardboard to make "logs" and then bury as "logs", especially pizza boxes.
.i been wanting to dig a hole for a while now, great exercise, just didn't have a need, till now!
Sarcasm the elf
03-26-2016, 20:10
Berkley Breathed leaves the least trace of all :D
https://animalfeasance.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/bloomcountymuchtooeco-friendly.jpg
The inconvenient truth is that not much actually breaks down in a landfill.
Christoph
03-27-2016, 10:19
I'm sure I've left a trace before (nobody's perfect) whether it be a wrapper blown away or my own 2 feet trampling down the trail. But I tend to pick up something if I see it along whatever trail I'm on. Hopefully I made it a little more pleasant for the next person by packing out a few Walmart bags here and there on the trail. Wrappers are light but distracting when you run across them in the woods.
saltysack
03-27-2016, 10:30
I'm sure I've left a trace before (nobody's perfect) whether it be a wrapper blown away or my own 2 feet trampling down the trail. But I tend to pick up something if I see it along whatever trail I'm on. Hopefully I made it a little more pleasant for the next person by packing out a few Walmart bags here and there on the trail. Wrappers are light but distracting when you run across them in the woods.
If everyone packed out alittle the trail would definitely be a lot cleaner...thx...I can't pass any trash on the trail without picking it up....anywhere for that matter.
wornoutboots
03-27-2016, 11:19
we care more about sex than polution cause one is life and one death.
Please pack out your used condoms :rolleyes:
wornoutboots
03-27-2016, 11:30
neatly folded wrapper back in the zip-loc. A
Sorry, no offense, but this made me laugh :D I do carry my trash out but never think about neatly folding it....
Sorry, no offense, but this made me laugh :D I do carry my trash out but never think about neatly folding it....
It's not done to be neat, but to keep the trash bag compact.
Pedaling Fool
05-17-2016, 07:20
This guy left much more than a trace... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkZDSqyE1do
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/man-planted-a-forest-the-size-of-central-park/
Imagine a completely barren island. No trees, no wildlife, no nothing. Now, imagine that very island, 37 years later, completely filled with trees (http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/ecosia-search-engine-has-helped-plant-millions-of-trees/), animals, and vegetation. Pretty amazing, huh? And wait, there’s more – one man planted every single tree, all by himself.
In this short clip (http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/short-film-showcase/india-man-plants-forest-bigger-than-central-park-to-save-his-island?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_fb20160510video-forestmannative&utm_campaign=Content&sf26014667=1) from a film called “Forest Man, (https://www.facebook.com/TheForestForTheTreesMovie)” director William Douglas McMaster (http://polygonwindowproductions.com/)highlights the work of an incredible man named Payeng. In 1979, Payeng’s island, in India, was threatened by erosion, so he made it his mission to reforest (http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/blind-man-and-his-armless-best-friend-plant-trees-in-china/) the island … and boy, did he succeed! Now, you can see wildlife thriving – rhinos, elephants, deer, tigers, and so many more!
rocketsocks
05-17-2016, 11:16
Thumbs up! Don't get why 51 down thumped it.
The most trace I left, one time, was bent down grass where I had slept I knew would spring back up as the morning increased.
I have considered planting trees, on my "wild animal browse" property. What trees? Not just any trees.
I think it is better to plant more "wild animal browse" shrubs. I can help propagate "starts" of the "wild animal browse" that is there, and help heal a scar in the dirt bank left there by illegal logging activity.
I read about a man who planted acorns in a natural pattern, in the Alps in Europe. He made a forest, at least that was in an illustrated book.
I don't leave anything and pack out all of my own trash. I don't usually have a way to quickly pick up and contain other trash I see on the trail, so I usually move past it and leave no trace that I was there to see it.