You don’t have access to view this content.
The Bio-Bio Trek, Chile
Volcanoes, hot springs, and breathtaking vistas in the Chilean Andes.
Volcanoes, hot springs, and breathtaking vistas in the Chilean Andes.
You don’t have access to view this content.
A look at five lightweight shelters with extra space for your partner, gear, or four-legged companion.
You don’t have access to view this content.
This article was originally published in issue 7 of the Backpacking Light Print Magazine. It has since been revised and updated by the author for web publication.
You don’t have access to view this content.
Step by step guide to simple, lightweight, inexpensive trekking pants.
You don’t have access to view this content.
A comparison of two full-featured down jackets with Quantum GL fabric and 850 fill power down.

Kristin and I duke it out to see which jacket is better. Trollveggen, Norway.
In the winter of 2011, Rab came out with the Infinity down jacket, one of the first commercial garments to use Pertex’s new Quantum GL 10D fabric (25 g/m2). The Infinity also marked the first time Rab used 850 fill power down in a product. This winter, GoLite entered the ring with the similarly designed, but lighter, Bitterroot down jacket, which also features Quantum GL and 850 fill power down. Both jackets have a bevy of features, like a full front zip, zippered hand pockets, internal pocket(s), and a hood.
Kristin wore the Infinity and I, the Bitterroot, through three months of backcountry skiing and camping in the European Alps and mountains of Norway. How do the two fare, on paper and under real world conditions?
| Golite Bitterroot | Rab Infinity | |||||
| All size medium | Womens | Mens | Womens | Mens | ||
| Fill Weight | 4.9oz (140g) | 5.3oz (150g) | 6oz (180g) | 7oz (210g) | ||
| Total Weight | 12oz (340g) | 13 oz (370g) | 14.5 oz (410g) | 16oz (460g) | ||
| Measured Weight | Not Tested | 13.8 oz (390g) | 12.1 oz (401g) | 15.2 oz (430g) | ||
| Down/Total Weight Ratio | 32.7 | 40.8 | 40.8 | 43.8 | ||
| MSRP (US) | $375* | $375* | $300 | $300 | ||
*See final note at end of article. New retail price is $199 as of March 2012.
850 fill power down, Pertex Quantum GL shell and lining, stitch-through baffle construction, insulated hood with nonadjustable elastic closing, elastic cuffs, full front zip with YKK5 zipper, zippered hand pockets with YKK3 zipper, double cordlock hem, and stuff sack included.

| GoLite Bitterroot | Rab Infinity | |||||||
| Womens | Mens | Womens | Mens | |||||
| Two-way front zip | Yes | Yes | No | No | ||||
| Chin guard lining | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Hand pocket lining | Yes | Yes | 1/2* | No | ||||
| Front zipper baffle | No | No | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Weatherproof zippers | No | No | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Internal pockets | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||||
*Microfleece lining only on outer side of pocket, not on palm side. See photo in Performance.
Kristin and I wore the jackets throughout a winter and spring of backcountry skiing. We wore the jackets at our snow camps, during lunch breaks, on summits, and even at night to boost the temperature rating of our 3-season quilt. We stuffed and unstuffed the jackets every day for months on end.
First, the fabric. At no time did the feathers poke through the Quantum GL. There are no tears, signs of abrasion, or unraveling seams. Moderate snowfall did not penetrate the Quantum GL, even though the fabric is not DWR treated. Call me impressed!

Front and rear views of the GoLite Mens Bitterroot and Rab Womens Infinity. The difference in stitching pattern is quite noticeable, particularly on the backside of the jackets.
The jackets are both very warm for their weight thanks to the light fabric and large amount of high-quality down. The Rab has quite a bit more down and feels like it is overstuffed. After months of use, the Infinity still lofts fully. Originally, the GoLite jacket had nearly as much loft as the Rab. However, by the end of our testing period, there were certain areas that had compacted slightly, like the inside of the elbow and the armpit. This isn’t necessarily indicative of a difference between the jackets. I do sweat more and am a warmer sleeper than Kristin, so it’s possible that this moisture wilted the GoLite down feathers slightly. Rab has a simpler stitching pattern on the back, which could save a bit of weight and cost compared with Golite’s more complicated pattern. GoLite’s stitching creates more cold spots but should also better hold the down in place. I’m unaware if there is any consensus on which method is better.

The womens Infinity has micro-fleece lining on the outer side of the pocket but none on the palm side (left). Long sleeves but short torso on the Infinity in womens medium (center). A tug on the jacket shows the excess of interior volume as the lower torso area is too loose fitting (right).
Kristin generally wears a size small, but had to move up to a medium Infinity for her arms to fit. With the medium, the sleeves are nice and long, but the torso is still on the short side and the torso has way too much extra space. Rab keeps the torso short so as to not interfere with a climbing harness. However, Kristin (like most females I know) really prefers a longer torso to cover most of the hips for better warmth retention.
The GoLite zippers are more finicky. The hidden zippers on the hand pockets are more likely to catch. I often had trouble starting the front zipper on the Bitterroot – I generally have this problem with two-way zippers. Furthermore, I find it unnecessary to have a two-way zipper on a jacket unless the torso is seriously long. For those who prefer a two-way front zipper, the Bitterroot is the way to go. Otherwise, the Infinity gets the nod here.

A peek inside of the Bitterroot (left) reveals two interior pockets: a small electronics pocket by my right hand, and large zippered mesh pocket on my left. High on the left side of the Infinity jacket is a small zippered pocket (right).
The two interior pockets on the GoLite were more useful than the single Rab pocket. The Bitterroot’s small pocket held my camera batteries and iPhone, and the large one held gloves or socks for drying, a hot water bottle, or even the jacket itself! Meanwhile the Infinity’s interior pocket was just large enough to hold a phone, point-and-shoot camera, and/or a few snack bars.

Left to right: 1-Liter Nalgene bottle, Infinity and Bitterroot, both in mens medium, in the manufacturer’s supplied stuff sacks. The Bitterroot can pack down more than the Infinity, but it is supplied with a larger stuff sack.
Upon returning to the States, I got hold of a regular production Bitterroot (the orange one that I had tested out in the field was a prototype) and an Infinity, both in mens medium. Now I could compare apples to apples. The direct comparison highlighted a few differences between the jackets that Kristin and I noticed earlier, but couldn’t be sure if the variance was from comparing mens and womens models. The Rab hood is thicker, more snug and has a higher collar. Rab’s hood is meant to go under the helmet, whereas GoLite says that their hood is helmet-compatible.

New jackets! Left to right: Infinity, Bitterroot, and hand pockets of Infinity vs. Bitterroot, both in mens medium.
The GoLite hand pockets are in a lower, more natural position whereas the Rab pockets are higher to avoid overlap with a climbing harness. The womens Infinity has micro-fleece lining on the outer portion of the pocket but not on the inner side. This is an excellent compromise,as it saves weight over a fully-lined pocket but still provides a soft touch to the more sensitive side of your hand, which happens to be the side that rests against the pocket (seriously, this is harder to describe than it is for you to go put your hands in your jacket pocket and see what I mean). I don’t understand why the women get this feature and the men do not. Similarly, the Bitterroot has a micro-fleece chin liner on the womens model, but not the mens. My chin stubble tears up the chins on most of my jackets over extended use, so I would appreciate the extra comfort and protection for the jacket, from me!

The Bitterroot (left) has a longer torso than the Infinity (right), which has a slight drop tail but is still shorter.
The mens jackets were cut like most down jackets – boxy and too much space around the torso for my preference. There was too much extra space even when wearing a thick baselayer and MontBell Thermawrap Parka. I also found that there was too much volume around the upper half of my arms, particularly with the Bitterroot. I exclusively wear mens medium-sized clothing, and particularly like the trim fit of MontBell and many European brands, so you may prefer the “standard” sizing of these jackets.

The Infinity has a weather-resistant zipper and full-length down-filled draft tube (left). The Bitterroot has a thin Quantum GL draft tube and only at the top of the zipper near the neck area. The rest of the zipper is unprotected.
Both jackets are excellent. They are well made, very warm and pretty darn light considering all of the features. They are also designed for different users. The Infinity has more down, consistently smooth weather-proof zippers, a down-filled draft tube, snugger hood, higher collar and harness-friendly hand pockets. If you want maximum warmth and weather protection, this is clearly the better choice. On our scale, the Infinity jackets weigh less than Rab’s specifications, whereas the Bitterroot weighs more, relative to GoLite’s specs. Finally, the Infinity retails for $75 less than the Bitterroot, meaning you get a lot more jacket for the money.
However, the Infinity may be overkill for certain users. If you’re mostly backpacking, I’d definitely consider the Bitterroot. It may not be quite as warm (based on the amount of down and lack of draft tube), but has a hip-covering torso and is 3 ounces (85 grams) lighter. The interior pockets are very useful, the microfleece-lined hand pockets are soft on the hand and in a more comfortable location, and some might prefer the two-way front zipper.
Final note: As this article went to publication, GoLite announced their new direct-to-consumer business model which substantially lowered the retail price of their entire line of products. The Bitterroot now retails for $199 – an excellent value and a significant savings over the Infinity. With this new pricing, it’s harder to make a compelling argument that justifies spending the extra $100 on the Infinity.

Staying warm on summits in Reihheimen National Park, Norway (left) and the Dolomites, Italy (right).
Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement.
The Pilgrimage via Grasshopper Ridge
You don’t have access to view this content.
A fully featured hard shell at a minimal weight.
The Rab Kinetic is a hard shell jacket that offers full features at a minimal weight. Much like it’s slightly lighter, but less featured sibling, the Pulse, the Kinetic is made of Pertex Shield Plus. Shield Plus is a 2.5 layer polyurethane coated fabric much like those offered on most other hard shells in this class. Compared to the previous Pertex Shield, the new Plus fabric has a much better feel, almost tissue paper-like. I much prefer the feel of the new Plus on my bare skin over the more trash bag-like feel of the previous Shield.

The author wearing the Kinetic as viewed from the front and side
Just like the Pulse, the Kinetic offers a full zipper (YKK Aquaguard) backed by an internal storm flap, a roll down helmet compatible hood, and a single exit hem drawcord. The Kinetic, also like the Pulse, comes in a medium cut, and that is where the similarities end. The Kinetic weighs in at one ounce more than the Pulse, and that extra ounce comes from the addition of a stiffened brim, two mesh-back hand pockets in place of the single chest pocket, and adjustable velcro closures on the wrists in place of the elastic. Undoubtedly those changes will be well worth the extra weight to some and not worth the bother to others.

The Kinetic has a helmet compatible hood that includes a foam stiffened brim, 3-way adjustability, and can be rolled away when not in use.
I have been using the Kinetic both on the trail and in town for the past couple of months and have found the performance quite favorable. Here in the Southeast, I find it practically impossible to hike with any hard shell during the warmer seasons. With our ridiculously high humidity I always find myself wet, either from my own perspiration or simply the rain itself, so unless hypothermia is a risk I usually choose the rain. With that said, if you’re looking for a lightweight shell capable of dealing with foul conditions the Kinetic is an excellent piece of gear.

The Kinetic includes two mesh-backed zippered pockets with the left doubling as a stuff sack.
| Year/Model | 2012 Rab Kinetic |
| Style | 2.5 L hard shell jacket |
| Weight | Manufacturer Specified: 8 oz (227 g) in men’s L BPL Measured: 7.8 oz (221 g) in men’s S |
| Features | YKK Aquaguard full zipper with storm flap, stiffened roll down helmet compatible hood, two zippered mesh-backed hand pockets, single exit drawcord hem, velcro adjustable wrist closure, left pocket doubles as stuff sack |
| MSRP | US $185 |
You don’t have access to view this content.
Is this the longest, toughest, roughest or hardest? The beauty of it is that at the finish no one knew or cared. Every competitor was left with indelible experiences, challenges accepted and honestly won or lost. Each had started with a clean slate and had accomplished every step in the wilderness through their own efforts. -Adrian Crane, writing about the Classic in Ultrarunning (1986)
You don’t have access to view this content.
You don’t have access to view this content.
Ryan and a group of Scouts search for solitude in Yellowstone National Park’s Lamar River Valley
You don’t have access to view this content.
A unique accessory pocket that can be used in multiple ways.
The Zpacks Multi-Pack is a unique product that doesn’t have any direct competition. Thanks to all of the available mounting options, you can use the Multi-Pack as a chest pocket hung from your pack’s shoulder straps, a pack lid, a waist pack (fanny pack?), or even a shoulder bag (purse or man bag). The Multi-Pack has three buckles and one webbing loop on each side that can be used with the four pieces of webbing also included. All four pieces of webbing can be attached to a backpack on one end and to the Multi-Pack on the other, and the two larger pieces can also be clipped to one another to form a waist belt or shoulder strap when using the Multi-Pack alone.

The Multi-Pack as viewed from the front and back showing the variety of mounting options
The Multi-Pack is a good size for general all-around use with a volume of around 215 cu in (3.5 L). Zpacks uses a waterproof hybrid material composed of Cuben Fiber and Nylon for the Multi-Pack (this is the same fabric used on their Exo backpack). The Multi-Pack features a water-resistant zipper for access, and the water-resistance of the pack itself is enhanced by placing the zipper across the front of the pack rather than on the top. However, the Multi-Pack is not seam sealed. So while it is quite water-resistant, it will not survive submersion, and when used in a long downpour water will eventually leak in.

The Multi-Pack uses a water-resistant zipper mounted across the front, rather than on top
Thanks to the variety of mounting options, the Multi-Pack can be attached to most any backpack. I primarily use the Hyperlite Mountain Gear Porter or a GoLite Rush 20 for my trips and had no problems mounting the Multi-Pack to either. On a recent overnight trip I was able to load all of my gear into the Rush 20 with the Multi-Pack mounted as a front or chest pouch. Using the Multi-Pack in this configuration allowed me to shift some weight to my chest and provided me with quick access to my camera, a Sony Nex-5n, and my day’s rations.

The Multi-Pack mounted to a GoLite Rush 20 for use as a front (or chest) pack
Overall, I believe the Multi-Pack is an excellent product that doesn’t really have any direct competition. With the variety of configurations and mounting options, this is an item that easily goes from backcountry to front country. The only thing preventing a Highly Recommended rating is that while the Multi-Pack is really good at several things, it doesn’t necessarily excel at any of them.
| Year/Model | 2012 Zpacks Multi-Pack |
| Style | Accessory pocket |
| Weight | Manufacturer Specified: 2.8 oz (80 g)BPL Measured: 2.8 oz (80 g) |
| Features | 4 adjustable straps, 3 buckles and 1 loop per side on the pocket, water-resistant zipper |
| Options | 40 inch (102 cm) or 50 inch (127 cm) belt for use as a waist belt or shoulder strap |
| MSRP | US $39.95 |
A look at several different chemical techniques for treating water in the backcountry.
You don’t have access to view this content.
Part 3 of this series takes a critical look at several water treatment technologies available to backpackers
You don’t have access to view this content.
MYOGers rejoice! SketchUp software, once mastered, can save you hours of guesswork and yards of material.
You don’t have access to view this content.
An extremely minimal trail runner with options for the wide footed.
The New Balance Minimus MT00 is a zero drop trail runner that is extremely minimal by design. Unlike a lot of trail runners, the MT00 is available in a 4E and, after having found the standard Minimus varieties too narrow in the toe, I was excited to try out the wider version. Getting straight to what all lightweight backpackers are interested in, my size 10 4E shoes weigh in at 10.3 oz (292 g) for the pair. Yep, they’re definitely light. In addition, these checked off several other good boxes on my most wanted list: they have zero drop (no heel-rise), are extremely breathable, and offer no support. I’d venture that the MT00 is one of the most minimal trail running shoes currently available.

The MT00 profile.
The MT00 consists of a largely mesh upper with strategically placed fabric overlays. The only padding found in the upper is around the upper ankle and in the heel cup. The shoe forgoes the more traditional removable padded insole and replaces it with a permanent piece of thin fabric. One good look over the MT00 and it’s apparent they’re designed to be worn sock-less (I still choose to wear socks for grit protection). The outsole shares the same pod-like design as the MT10/MT20 but only uses Vibram rubber in high-wear areas (blue areas). All other portions of the outsole use a blown foam (dark grey areas). My understanding is that New Balance determined the high-wear areas based on feedback from testers as well as from studying returned test shoes.

The MT00 mapped outsole.
While I don’t consider myself to have a truly wide foot, I do have a fairly squared off profile with my toes so shoes with a wide toe-box tend to fit me best. The standard width Minimus shoes are too narrow for me, as mentioned above, but I find the 4E version to be just fine, if even a bit too wide in all but the toe. After having a lot of trouble finding a trail shoe that fit properly, I really wanted the MT00 to work. Unfortunately, a recent high mileage day hike across typical Southeastern terrain left me unsatisfied. I really like the fit of the shoe as well as the overall minimal design, but I feel that the outsole is best suited to smoother terrain. If you find yourself traveling mostly on hard-pack (or maybe soft-pack) dirt or duff, these shoes will likely be just fine. If you’re generally on rocks and roots though, the MT00 probably isn’t the best fit.

The MT00 upper. Looking closely you can see right through the mesh.
My first trip was less than 10 miles but included several water crossings as well as some off-trail travel. I had no issues with the MT00 and found them to drain far better than any shoes I’ve previously worn. Post-trip, I was still very enthused with this shoe. My next trip, however, left me with some residual damage. We covered approximately 22 miles of mixed trail and gravel road and, between the roots on the trails as well as the larger gravel, my feet were left in a bit of agony. Even though the trip was a few weeks back, I still have some tenderness in my arches that I mostly notice after walking a few miles (you can see in the outsole photo above that the arches use the blown foam in place of the harder Vibram rubber). As far as wear, I only see minimal indications, primarily limited to the foam areas of the outsole.

I’m a firm believer that you can judge the breathability of a shoe by how dirty your feet get. This is after 22 miles, and I even wore socks.
All said and done, even though I consider myself a minimalist when it comes to footwear and try to go barefoot as often as possible (even on asphalt), I found the MT00 to be a bit too bare for my typical trail conditions. If you find yourself mostly traveling on smooth terrain, be it on trail or off, these might be a great shoe for you. However, if you tend to spend more time on rocks, roots, or otherwise rough ground the MT00 will probably leave you wanting a bit more underfoot protection. As a side note, I could see these being a great shoe for packrafting or other sports where you spend more time on the water than on foot.
| Year/Model | 2012 New Balance MT00 4E |
| Style | Minimalist trail running shoe |
| Weight | Manufacturer Specified: 4.4 oz (124 g) per shoe men’s 9 D BPL Measured: 10.3 oz (292 g) per pair men’s 10 4E |
| Features | Zero drop, mapped outsole built of Vibram rubber and blown foam, mesh upper with fabric overlays and no-sew construction |
| Options | D and 4E widths |
| MSRP | US $109.99 |
Remove, kill, or inactivate? Part two of this series analyzes the legal and technical definitions as well as the practical significance of water purification and filtration.
You don’t have access to view this content.
Backpacking and Packrafting Glacier National Park and the Bob Marshall Wilderness
You don’t have access to view this content.
The first part of this series provides an overview of the threats that can exist in untreated (and in some cases treated) water sources. Squeamish and hypochondriac readers be warned.
Water in the field is not always safe to drink. We examine some of the problems that can exist, and we survey all lightweight water treatment methods for use against these problems. We also illustrate each method with at least one commercial product, but this is not meant to be a State of the Market survey of products.
Everyone needs to drink water when working. Yes, one can go for days (or weeks in some famous cases) without food, but after a few days without water, you die. However, not all water sources found in the wild are safe (and some at home are a bit questionable too!). So, in Part 1 of this series, we start by discussing what ‘stuff’ can be found in water sources and whether it is dangerous to you. While this will get a little technical in places, we will try to keep it comprehensible to all.

In Part 2 we will look at what you need to do (or can do) to make water safe. We will also cover the legal aspects of water treatment: what the USA Environmental Protection Agency allows vendors to claim. Since a lot of this touches on ‘public health’ issues, there are government regulations (set by the EPA) to consider. These specify how much reduction in contamination is required to meet the regulations. Honesty in advertising may not be found everywhere, but the EPA does try to help. And yes, the message here is ‘reduction’, not elimination. This will be explained. Things will get a little technical here.
In Part 3 we will survey the range of methods available for dealing with all that ‘stuff’. It will become immediately clear that no one method can handle all threats – short of osmotic filtering followed by triple distillation. We will illustrate the methods by looking at some commercial products, using them as examples. This is not a complete State of The Market Survey of products; rather it’s information about risks and ways to handle them.
It should be noted that a lot of the information available on the web and in the literature about water risks and treatment methods has been written by vendors, who have a vested interest in selling you their gear. They do sometime hype the risk and their products. That does not mean there is no problem – far from it. But there have been and still are some cowboys out there. Some of them may be in jail these days though, following EPA prosecution (yes, I know of cases).
Some illustrations in this Part 1 are from published research papers I have collected over the years; many are from the Wikipedia Commons. All are gratefully acknowledged.
Some of this material has been taken from the Australian Bushwalking FAQ web site. I own the copyright there.
As usual, we start with theory. It’s not that hard, so stop panicking. Broadly speaking, there are four main classes of contaminants:
Each category requires different handling to meet the requirements of the American Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). This organisation is the largest internationally-recognised certification body for water purifiers. Please note at this point: in America the word purifier as used in the context of water treatment has a defined legal meaning. If a company tries to use the word without meeting the legal requirements, they can and have been prosecuted and potentially jailed. But there are many traps for the unwary here, and I have seen a few of them.
This category covers ‘natural’ things that are relatively harmless, assuming you exclude the third category listed above. One very common example is Tannic acid. This is the stuff that leaches out of timber and leaves and makes some streams brown. A common suggestion is that you should just warm this up, add milk and sugar, and behold: tea (or coffee). Apart from dissolving any natural fibre clothing and rotting the guts out of leather boots, tannin will do you no harm. However, too much of this sort of stuff can make the water difficult to treat for other problems.

Sometimes leaves can leach out strange vegetable oils that behave a bit like surfactants. The bubbles in the water here are not dishwashing pollution – not where that photo was taken! The water was actually very clean, with just a bit of natural leaf oils for amusement. But – you do have to know the difference!
Another common contaminant gives you ordinary salty or brackish water. This will do you no real harm either, although it may not be very useful for survival. That’s a specialised subject that we won’t go into here. One could argue that some so-called ‘sports drinks’ should also fall into this category: some of them taste pretty awful to me. Some have been linked with collapses in marathons.
Smelly or stagnant water can also fit into this category. My wife and I have drunk really smelly stagnant water bailed out of a hole dug in the ground on a couple of occasions – we were running a little close to the edge those times. I had to block my nose before I could drink it, but it was ‘safe’ to drink (we didn’t die). However, other things can make water ‘smelly’ so making such a judgment carries risks.
You know that brown stuff you sometimes find floating in the water? Bits of algae and so on? In general, this stuff won’t do you much harm either (in general). Much of it can be filtered out with a handkerchief if you are worried by the appearance. We have bailed and filtered water out of many a muddy soak: despite filtration through cloth, it often remained the colour of tea. But it did us no harm, and dinner was fine. The one exception is blue-green algae: it is very toxic so leave this stuff well alone. How to tell whether something is blue-green algae is not covered here: I don’t know.
Also included in this category are things like granite dust: the stuff that makes some high mountain streams seem almost white. Now, in theory, granite dust should not harm you, although I would recommend you not to push your luck here. There are white mountain rivers in Nepal which are famous for this, and they should not be drunk. But it’s all the upstream villages that are the real danger here!
This category is different from the first one purely by definition. It includes all the sorts of industrial and agricultural chemicals that can do you a nasty. To be sure, normally you would not expect to meet many of them in the wild, but you sure can. Downstream from intensive agriculture is one danger zone, sadly. You only have to read the reports on the contaminants reaching coral reefs from farming use to realise the hazard. Being downstream from some mines is another hazard: old silver mines usually leach arsenic for instance. Charming – toxic and carcinogenic.

A recent hazard are the chemical used in Coal Seam Gas Fracking. They can get into the water supply and do you a lot of harm. There is a famous and viral video on the net of someone lighting the water coming out of their kitchen tap: dissolved methane!
Another set of dissolved chemicals includes chlorine and ammonia, as used by many Water Authorities to render the water supply ‘safe to drink’. It may be medically safe, but I find the smell revolting at times. So do many others, leading to thriving business in the sale of activated carbon filters for the kitchen for drinking water. These filters do reduce the amount of chlorine and ammonia in the water for a while, but please note that vendors cannot make any guarantees about how effective their filters are, or how long they will last.
The bottom line here is that water with any of these dissolved chemicals in it cannot be treated very reliably. The only safe thing to do is to seek better water elsewhere. Don’t use water draining from any of these areas. How to tell? That’s difficult, but looking upstream on your maps can help.
Now we are getting serious (and technical). This category is the one to worry about and the one this article is mainly about. It includes several sub-categories of nasties, arranged by size:

Viruses are extremely small, generally well below 0.1 um in size, down to 0.004 um. They include the rotavirus family, which includes Varicella (more commonly known as chicken pox), the polio virus, the Marburg virus and many others. The Marburg virus was first noticed in Marburg, Germany, but came to greater fame in the Congo, where in a short period it killed 128 people with a fatality rate of 83% of infections. Not pretty. Ebola hemorrhagic fever is another virus, and a pretty nasty one at that.
Not all viruses are lethal: the common cold is a rhinovirus. Actually, over 200 different viruses can give cold-like symptoms. In general you will not be in too much danger from viruses in the bush in Western countries, which is fortunate as most filters cannot reliably filter them out of the water: they are much too small. We will discuss this again later. African countries are another matter: the animal population pools and the poor standards of hygiene there can make the risks quite large.
However, being in a Western country does not mean you are risk free. Beware when downstream of any Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP). We were on a river below a large town some years ago and drank the water after careful filtration through a Katadyn filter. Little did we know! The virus load from the STP went straight through the filter. We got home that day (fortunately), but spent the next 24 hours on our backs in a very bad way. We were only semi-conscious for some of that time. Fancy that in the wild?
This particular incident was a worry as the river went straight into the Sydney water supply, which is one reason the Sydney water has to be treated with chlorine and ammonia so heavily. The ironic part is that, since the Town Council refused to clean up their STP, or couldn’t afford to (and didn’t need to for their rate-payers), the State government was forced to fund a whole new plant for them to protect Sydney. It’s called politics.

Viruses can affect most parts of your body. The diagram here illustrates how some of them affect you. It should be noted that this diagram does not cover everything: new viruses are being discovered all the time. Many unexplained aches and pains are found to be caused by new viruses.
Some filter manufacturers (eg Katadyn) claim that viruses are always attached to something larger and so can be filtered out. Well, this may work for 99% of the viruses in the water, but 1% is still quite enough to make you very seriously ill. One filter manufacturer (General Ecology) claims that their patented filter can remove viruses by an extra process: this appears to be accepted by the EPA. See Part 2 for more information.
Most viruses can be treated with heat, UV, or chemicals. I say most, not all, because there are some diabolical viruses out there that can survive in near-boiling water. They evolved in hot springs and geysers.
While perhaps not a serious concern in the USA, Europe or Australia, viruses are a real hazard when you go overseas to places like Nepal and Africa. Too often villages use the river as the sewerage disposal system: I have seen many toilet sheds sitting over the edge of the river!
These generally fall into the 0.4 to 1 um range. They include things like cholera, salmonella, legionnaires and of course Escherichia coli (the cause of most ‘gastro’). To a biologist and others of that ilk, they are a different sort of beastie to a virus. In fact, it is possible for a bacterium to carry a virus inside it.
The technical difference between a virus and a bacterium is interesting, and reflects a major step in the evolution of life on Earth. A virus can be nearly crystalline (which is pretty amazing in itself), but a bacterium has structure. An outer membrane typically encloses fluid with DNA swimming around inside the membrane. In effect, a bacterium is a sort of single prokaryotic (‘no nucleus’) cell. When the cell grows big enough, it splits into two identical cells in a process called fission. This is how bacteria grow and multiply inside you. Some can divide once every 10 minutes!
Many bacteria exist singly, but some can associate into bacterial mats or biofilms. Some sorts clump together when starved to make ‘fruiting bodies’, containing up to 100,000 cells. Fascinating stuff, and far more complex than I have described here.

For walkers the big risk is the E coli bacterium, illustrated here with an electron micrograph. It is commonly used as a measure of fecal contamination, which gives you a very good idea of where it comes from. In your bowels, it is fairly harmless, and almost everyone would have them there. However, if it gets into your stomach it will cause very big problems: ‘gastro’, diarrhea and dysentery, not to mention a ‘crook gut’. That it lives in your bowels causes some confusion for many.
It may surprise you to find out that there are hordes of different sorts of E coli species. Many are specific to one sort of animal: cows, etc. Some are relatively harmless; others, such as the recent O157:H7, can damage your kidneys and even be fatal. Check the numbers on that one: they give you some sort of idea of just how many different sorts there are. The same applies to most other species of bugs as well.

Another dangerous species is Salmonella. This false-colour image shows Salmonella bacteria invading human cells in the lab. These have been found on poorly prepared or handled food in supermarkets (meat, eggs, etc). They can cause diarrhea, fever, vomiting, and abdominal cramps 12 to 72 hours after infection. Most people recover, but dehydration can be a serious risk. The typhoidal form of Salmonella can lead to typhoid fever, which is a life-threatening illness. About 400 cases are reported each year in the United States, and 75% of these are acquired while out of the country. Transfer is usually by the fecal route.

Some idea of the range of problems presented by bacteria can be seen here. Yes, a bit technical, and no, you wouldn’t normally meet many of these. Fortunately! It is in fact amusing to note the Helicobacter pylori, now known to be the real cause of stomach ulcers. Once the bane of harried business men, but now easily cured with the right antibiotic.
Bacterial growth requires nutrients or food. This is obtained from your body. By itself, this is not necessarily harmful. In fact, without a healthy population of bacteria all through your body you would be dead. They protect your skin and they run your bowels. Their action is what digests the food you eat. It has been estimated that your body holds more bacteria than ‘human’ cells. The mainly American craze for sterilising everything is, in fact, potentially dangerous to your health: you need bacteria to survive. However, some bacteria can leak harmful toxins. Those bacteria are the ones we need to watch out for.
As I just mentioned, your bowels are host to a huge mass of bacteria that are vital to your continued health. However, they must stay in their right place, your bowels, and not get into your stomach. In this context, it is important to note that bacteria cannot go backwards from your bowels to your stomach: there is a valve there to block any backflow. The principle way for bacteria to get to your stomach is through your mouth, usually from your hands. Wash your hands after going to the toilet! That said, some transmission is possible through wounds and blood during accidents, which is why medics use gloves.
Some very popular camping sites on rivers have an undeserved reputation for having ‘bad water’. Curiously, people who subscribe to this idea seem happy to drink the water from the river when further downstream. I am willing to bet that much of this reputation derives entirely from the number of young inexperienced campers who have gotten sick there, and that in all cases it was really because they didn’t wash their hands after going to the toilet. I am not alone in thinking this: see for instance class=”numorator”>2010/05/100505113249.htm Real-World Proof of Hand Washing’s Effectiveness in Science Daily. That said, it is known that cows can carry some strains of E coli that can be quite dangerous (or fatal) to humans, so watch out in farming areas.
Bacteria can (usually) be treated by filtration, chemicals, UV light and heat.

Protozoa are large, typically over 6 um in size. This category includes the Cryptosporidium family and the now well-known Giardia lamblia illustrated here in delightful detail. Cryptosporidium can be widespread at a low level, even in municipal water pipes, while Giardia seem ubiquitous. I gather the Giardia cysts can be spread by the likes of foxes and possibly some native animals, but they originally come from humans – again via the fecal route.

They have a complex life cycle, cycling between an active state and an egg-like cyst. After you swallow them, they hatch out of their cysts in your stomach and attach themselves to the walls of your bowels. If you look at the previous illustration, you will see what looks like a huge sucker on the underside of the bug. It is just that, and is used to attach itself to the inside surface of your stomach or bowels. Once attached, they grow, feeding off your blood stream by sucking blood through the walls via that sucker. The photo here shows a really bad infestation of G lamblia attached to the intestines of a gerbil, feeding. The author of the photo does not record what the gerbil thought of the matter. Once adequately fed they turn into several cysts (i.e. they multiply) and pass out of you (in the usual way). If they get a chance they will float around as cysts until some other hapless soul drinks the water, then they wake up in the gut and start again. Every 12 hours they fission or divide into two. This may not sound like much, but after ten days of infection you could have a million of them growing there on your blood supply and irritating the hell out of your bowels. The loss of nutrients from your bloodstream can be serious too.

The dose quoted as being sufficient for infection is about 10 cysts. Why not just one cyst I do not know, but apparently some people can have some resistance – which can also be overwhelmed by a big enough population. The symptoms of a G lamblia infection develop slowly, taking a week and a half to two weeks to become apparent. A figure of 10 days is often quoted. If you feel sick a day or two after drinking suspect water you can be reasonably sure it is not G lamblia. It’s very likely to be E coli. In general, you won’t notice any Giardia symptoms until well after you have got home from the trip.
If you are infected you become sensitive to any fats and rumble very loudly, usually in public, and especially after eating anything fatty – like cheese. You can be infected for weeks before you wake up to the fact that something is the matter, and in that time you will be spreading a huge load of cysts for others to ingest. Not good. It seems that some people get really hung up on the whole Giardia thing: there is even a Giardia Club in America! Reality check: they sell water filters and chemicals for outdoors people. But the site has some good information.
The big worry is that it isn’t just humans who carry G lamblia: quite a few other animal populations can spread it around, including foxes and some native animals. The Whites River corridor in the Snowy Mountains in Australia, beloved of skiers in winter, was notorious for it. Personally, I put much of the blame on the pit toilet at Whites River Hut: it was so dilapidated that most people were not game to step on the floor, let alone sit on the seat, for fear it would collapse under their weight. You can work out the rest for yourself.
Giardia lamblia are not the only protozoa of concern. Cryptosporidium are small protozoa that can cause acute short-term gastro-intestinal illness with diarrhea. There are many varieties of it. I have seen claims that Cryptosporidium can be smaller than the 6 micron limit mentioned above. Cryptosporidium is the organism most commonly isolated in HIV positive patients with diarrhea. Interestingly, they are fairly resistant to chlorine, which presents a problem for the water supply authorities. Fortunately, they are quite susceptible to UV and boiling, while filtering also works due to their size.

There are many other protozoa in the world. Four general categories are illustrated here. You might now recognise the one second from the left. All can be dangerous, but there are several practical ways of dealing with them. You can boil the water, filter the water with a good EPA-rated filter or treat it with UV light. Note especially that research papers report that chlorine and some other chemicals will not work reliably on G lamblia or Cryptosporidium, no matter what the vendors claim on their packets, and it seems that even iodine is not always entirely successful against Crypto. Their hard cyst shells are a great defense against the inwards diffusion of the chemicals. However, it seems that chlorine dioxide may be effective given enough time.
I don’t know a lot about this class, so I will include a number of quotes from Wikipedia. You can get a lot more detail there if you wish.

These are even bigger, and can be every bit as nasty as any of the above or worse. Once again, there are many different sorts, a few of which are shown here. They are not that common and can be filtered out quite easily. You will run into them overseas in the tropical and Asian areas, and in a few places in America. Some of them, quite delightfully, bore into your skin (through your feet for instance), enter your blood supply, and take up residence in an internal organ. Very charming. Ultimately I believe some of them can be fatal. On the other hand, there have been experiments using certain worms aimed at boosting a person’s immune system. Figure that one out!

These are roundworms or nematodes (even if they look like bean sprouts). They are slender worms, typically less than 2.5 mm (0.10″) long.
The smallest nematodes are microscopic, while free-living species can reach as much as 50 mm (2.0″) in length and some parasitic species are larger still. The ‘mouth’ is lined with cuticle, which is often strengthened with ridges or other structures, and, especially in carnivorous species, may bear a number of teeth. The mouth often includes a sharp stylet that the animal can thrust into its prey. In some species, the stylet is hollow, and can be used to suck liquids from plants or animals. Nematode species are very difficult to distinguish; over 28,000 have been described, of which over 16,000 are parasitic. The total number of nematode species has been estimated to be about 1,000,000. In general, they have tubular digestive systems with openings at both ends. Is that enough?
Common parasitic nematodes include ascarids (Ascaris), filarias, hookworms, pinworms (Enterobius) and whipworms (Trichuris trichiura). The species Trichinella spiralis, commonly known as the ‘trichina worm’, occurs in rats, pigs, and humans, and is responsible for the disease trichinosis. Baylisascaris usually infests wild animals, but can be deadly to humans, as well. Hundreds of Caenorhabditis elegans were the only known living organisms to have survived the Space Shuttle Columbia Disaster. I could go on, but I won’t.

Schistosoma, commonly known as blood-flukes and bilharzia, includes flatworms which are responsible for a highly significant parasitic infection of humans by causing the disease schistosomiasis. This is considered by the World Health Organization as the second most socioeconomically devastating parasitic disease, next only to malaria, with hundreds of millions infected worldwide. They can be quite large: in the photo here the small white bar is 0.5 mm long.
Adult worms parasitize some blood vessels. Eggs are passed through urine or feces to fresh water, where larva must pass though an intermediate snail host, before a different larval stage of the parasite emerges that can infect a new mammalian host by directly penetrating the skin. Yes, that means you don’t have to swallow them: they can burrow into your feet while you are wading. As such, I guess they may not be considered solely a hazard in drinking water.

The hookworm is a parasitic nematode that lives in the small intestine of a mammalian host – dog, cat, or human. Two species of hookworms commonly infect humans: Ancylostoma duodenale and Necator americanus. A. duodenale predominates in the Middle East, North Africa, India and (formerly) in southern Europe, while N. americanus predominates in the Americas, Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, China, and Indonesia. Hookworms are thought to infect more than 600 million people worldwide.
The most significant risk from hookworm infection is anemia, secondary to loss of iron (and protein) in the gut. The worms suck blood voraciously and damage the mucosa – the lining of the gut. Hookworm is a leading cause of mother and child death in the developing countries of the tropics and subtropics. In susceptible children, hookworms cause intellectual, cognitive and growth retardation.
All of the above can be a bit intimidating, but it is worth remembering that many walkers never treat their water at all – and survive to a ripe old age. So to conclude this Part 1, I will briefly try to put all this in some sort of context.
For most walkers in the Western world the two biggest threats are E coli and G lamblia. The threat from E coli is ‘gastro’: stomach pains and diarrhea/dysentery. But E coli are mainly transmitted by the fecal route, and most people actually infect themselves. If you wash your hands with soap and water every time immediately after going to the toilet you will probably never encounter it. Mind you, the same could be said about behaviour at home. Giardia is not that common, except under special cases (like the Whites River case I mentioned above). With a modicum of care about where you collect your water from, you are unlikely to ever encounter it either.
An amusing side story here for your entertainment. The Thredbo ski resort in Australia was hit some years ago with an outbreak of gastro. It took some work to discover the source. The sewerage treatment plant was down-river from the village, and the water collection areas were up the valley and hillsides above the village. There was ‘no way’ there could have been any cross-infection over that distance, uphill. No way – until some realised that ducks sometimes swam in the open secondary treatment ponds before flying up the valley to the streams used as the water supply. Oops! Covers were placed over the ponds.

I started off never bothering. Then I got Giardia in Whites River during one ski touring trip, and became quite devoted to the subject of water treatment. (A very popular place for novice tourers, with an appalling and unsafe long-drop toilet which no-one used.) The treatment, one dose of Flagyl, was worse than the disease! But, after a while, I realised I was doing an awful lot of work to no real purpose, and I stopped treating our water. Instead, I paid a whole lot more attention to what water I collected, or rather, where I collected it. I focused on small side creeks with ‘clean’ headwaters instead of large rivers, and never from below any sort of human habitation. I especially like small springs where the water comes out of the ground: a built-in filtration system. I haven’t got sick since.
If you are one of the unfortunate people who have been sick from gastro, the message is clear. If you got Giardia, my sympathy (I have had it too), but please remember that your case is one experience out of tens or hundreds of thousands of nights of bug-free camping. If you have to use suspect water sources, then some sort of treatment might be smart.
In Part 2 we will look at what you need to do if you want to treat your water, and at what the EPA regulations have to say on the matter. I will say here that you do not have to achieve a 100% elimination of all bugs and wogs; all you have to do is to get their concentration down to a level your body can handle.
In Part 3 we will look at treatment methods (at last), and illustrate these methods with actual commercial gear. This will not be a comprehensive survey of every brand and model on the market: we are concentrating on the different methods.
First update from Balls and Sunshine on their journey along the Appalachian Trail!
You don’t have access to view this content.