Ultralight Backpacking Ethically (UBE)

I probably shoulda stayed out of the secular aspect; I'm particularly sensitive to such issues right now. FWIW, I actually agree with many of the things Douglas and Anna have just said. I don't think anyone here would condone FGM, genocide, torture, or other such stuff…

My point about striving to understand is that if there's an anti-social (of course, does depend on the society) behaviour that you feel needs to change, you won't get far by telling someone "you're ignorant," or "you're wrong." You can't persuade them to change unless you understand why they're following a particular practice in the first place. Only by fully understanding why they're doing something can you help them make their way to your point of view.

And that's where I'll bring it back to the backpacking aspect! I've found people quite resistant to change from heavy, traditional backpacking styles if I just start off talking about ultralight. But if I start out asking them questions about how and why they travel the backcountry, etc, then I can see which points of UL philosophy might appeal to them the most. Instead of framing discussion in terms of ultralight, I just talk about it as backpacking… 'cause to me, that's really what it's become.

Cheers, and peace-

You city live, you ride a bike or walk. And you carpool to the mountains. It works for you. Good. I have no issue with that.

One time long ago I lived that way as well. I walked everywhere or biked. Lived in a centrally located area. Then I got older, had a kid and found that it wasn't so easy. I wanted my child to have a yard like I did, a school system that was great and fully funded. I wanted a low crime area. I didn't want to be in my home at night listening to car alarms, emergency vehicles and neither did I want to deal with traffic to get out of the city.

People change, that is a fact of life. What is once easy becomes hard to do. Often it is phases of life. You grow up in the suburbs or the country, so that you will have good schools, low crime and fresh air. You city live in your 20's – it can be cheap, fun filled and ways to enjoy everything a person wants is nearby. Kids in your 30-40's means back to living farther away – you need a home big enough, you go farther out to buy more house for less money. Often older adults, free of kids return back to city living as they want activities and less maintenance.

It is all about choices in how people live. It does not mean that those who prefer big homes, big cars and big families are any less than those who live meagerly in a studio. Often it is because they have achieved the ability to live that way through hard work. Neither does it mean that they don't value the Earth either. They are simply humans, living.

"you won't get far by telling someone "you're ignorant," or "you're wrong.""

We agree on much. Took me awhile to learn the above lesson. I'm older, mellower, not such an angry young man.

Yes, back to backpacking. My refuge from this crazy world!

Have fun. Live happy. Smile often.

or, as one of my favorite groups, Over The Rhine, put it: "Pursue justice. Seek wisdom. Be merciful. Embrace beauty. Roll over. Good dog."

I agree. Good dog. Although some statements/beliefs are right or wrong in light of all available (or unavailable) evidence, I have chosen not to engage in arguments with those who utilize fiats. Gets us nowhere as people.
Nice segue, Brad. Back to backpacking….I have chosen to keep environmental ethics above being super-duper rad ultralight. My other obstacle to being lighter, then, is not finding the environmental options so much as staying warm. I am not one of you fortunate guys who can sleep under a tarp in the snow (yes, i exaggerate…but you get the point). I sleep in a 0-degree bag in summer and just stay comfortable. Add a UL quilt over that for anything below 60 degrees at night. Plus the usual layers of clothes. I would like to find a single-wall shelter solution, though, that will also keep me warm. I have a lightweight tent that has seen better days, and it is about time to stop doing repairs.

"would like to find a single-wall shelter solution, though, that will also keep me warm."

You might want to check out bivy bags, maybe even something like an ID Unishelter. Also, if you don't already, consider eating a good heavy meal at the end of the day and let your thermogenic processes help keep you warm at night.

After reading all of the arguments until now two things I think need to be established first before any kind of discussion can progress, namely:

1) Do you believe there is a problem the planet is facing? If not, then any talk about the ethicality of ultralight or regular backpacking is moot. Are there any people here who flat out deny there is a problem?

2) If you do believe there is a problem, what would you consider excess? If no consensus on excess can be reached, then we're doomed. By the same token, what are the bare minimum and optimal conditions we must set in order to give the planet a fighting chance?

The argument for protecting the ecosystem depends on our cooperating and agreeing on standards to aim for. Individuals need to practice some form of conforming to these standards and to what the group thinks is best for the whole, and these individuals need to accept some level of letting go of doing whatever they please. Just because an individual "likes" something doesn't mean it is the best thing for the planet or that the planet can tolerate the activity. Lots of individuals love eating tuna, but at present levels tuna are disappearing and are on the verge of going extinct in the next ten years. It happened to the North Atlantic cod. No reason why it couldn't happen to the tuna. There are times when an individual's wants are outweighed by the needs of the whole community.

But the American argument so often is, "I have my rights!" How can any problems be even acknowledged to exist in such an atmosphere?

Yea, my Civic is an HX. And it's not that boring, it has VTEC and with the tall gears you can go 60 in 2nd.

.

Miguel- you have some really good points, though I think we can skip over the "is there really a problem?" part. If a person thinks there is no problem and cannot be convinced otherwise with all available data, then at that point, those of us who know better are wasting our time and should just stop. I began the post because there IS a problem, and I want to make my actions count for as much as possible. You are correct about the American stance on individual rights; people are right to be concerned about their freedoms being taken away. [In a shameless employment of cultural reference] what they do not realize is that Spock was correct about the needs of the many. I think that, because of fierce individualism being seen as an absolute good, people in the U.S. have come to think of themselves as existing in little bubbles-each contains one person and his/her rights. I.e., One person eating tuna doesn't affect anyone else and if you don't want to eat tuna that's fine, but it's my right to do so, so leave me alone and don't try to repress my right to eat tuna. Something like that.
For me, this is where the ethical stance comes in, where an individual's rights should not infringe on the health or safety of another person (for some, other species as well). This includes every person, no matter where they live. Obviously, the arguments can get pretty complicated, but they don't really have to.
You are exactly right. Individuals, especially in the U.S., need to realize the impacts of their actions on a global scale. It isn't all about one person. If nothing else, I would love to see more people ask themselves the level of environmental damage that they are willing to pass on to their children.
To that end, I think people should be willing to sacrifice a great deal more of the extraneous things in their lives than they currently do.

No…you cannot drive in Oregon at 14….legally.

I'm 27. Not sure where you got the impression that I am 14. Must be thinking of someone else.

"You are correct about the American stance on individual rights; people are right to be concerned about their freedoms being taken away. … because of fierce individualism being seen as an absolute good"

Hahahahahaha …. oops. Excuse me. Ummmmm, while there is a small subset of Americans who are truly concerned about their freedoms (per Bill of Rights), most are really only concerned about their freedom to be greedy, their freedom to buy the next biggest newest toy they can, their freedom to be as ignorant as they want to be. Americans have, for quite some time, been MORE than willing to give up their basic freedoms for some false sense of security from the boogie men endlessly peddled by our jingoistic politicians/other people of power. Fierce individualism? Hardly, not for most, not in this country any longer. It's a myth. We're soft. We're lazy. We're way too complacent. Been like that for many a moon now. But we do so love to think of ourselves in that Marlboro Man manner.

A gross generalization, yup. Certainly doesn't apply to everybody. But, in my always humble opinion, it applies to most in this country nowadays.

Exactly. Americans think of themselves as the rugged individualists of the romanticized American West (or some comparable nonsense). Yet we are chronically dependent on other people and/or technology to do the work for us. I think that the perceived individualism and actual rampant materialism are certainly mutually exclusive.
I think (or hope to think) that the generalization does not apply to most people. I think that ignorance of the true impacts of one's actions can be applied to most, though.
It's good to bring that up–that people are willing to sacrifice basic freedoms for a false sense of protection. And the ones who scream about their freedoms being taken away are the ones most willing to give them up, who actually already have handed them over to some degree. But we won't sacrifice a greedy, materialistic culture in order to help actually ensure our own survival as individuals and as a species.
Back to backpacking….

nm

Ask your boss.

nm

Then…a backpacking forum is probably not going to help you answer that question.

Has anybody done research on the environmental impacts of various types of gear you own? Anybody interested in doing so? A cradle to grave analysis for a single piece of gear?

Anna,

I've really enjoyed this discussion. Thanks. I always balk at the effort/resources required to determine the energy consumed and waste created by a potential piece of gear. There are so many factors to consider, including the lifespan of the gear, the materials used to construct it, the conditions of the workers who do the constructing, the conditions of the workers who harvest the raw materials, etc. etc. etc., that it seems like it would take an inordinate amount of time (and money spent in the form of phone calls, internet energy, etc.) collecting this information and processing it. This process would significantly add to the cost of any particular gear. Let's say that the time-and-money spent collecting and processing this information is roughly $100. Wouldn't it be better to spend that money in a pursuit that actively conserves energy elsewhere. Carbon offsets, reforestation projects, and the like?

If you're going to buy a piece of gear you need, there will be energy consumed and waste created no matter what. How much energy and waste can you save by careful shopping, when you factor in the time and money spent collecting the information to compare products? Probably not very much.

I think general guidelines are probably more in order. Such as, buy durable gear. Buy gear that can be recycled. Recycle your old gear. Buy used gear. Etc. The effort required to track and compare diffferent products may consume more energy than it saves in the long run…..

Just a thought!

Man and Mule PCT thru-hike

http://www.manandmule.com/

Craig (the same here on BPL) and I often joke (seriously) about themed trips like this guy's.

What peeked my interest with this project is the notion that you can still pursue the small or large feats we're commonly enjoying, while finding alternatives, and challenges, in the doing. And that's most of us here at BPL, but through Bronze's exploration of era-specific gear , and the great comments in his gear-list, it's obvious to me that we can focus our ingenuity toward many methods and ideas, and realize deeper philosophies in the practice. My point: that we can conceive our place in nature with humility; really explore and know your limits, instead of fueling an ego with gadgetry and technologies.

One comment on Bronze's gear-list was a suggestion to use wool blankets, "just use two wool blankets. you’ll harden up in a few days and be able to sleep anywhere on anything."

Right f'ing on!

That excites me more than a cuber-fiber down mat. What's even more exciting is realizing the possibilities of modern UL methods and natural fibers, coupled with some of that down n' dirty Roughin'-It.

I'm digressing, but Douglas hit the mark, "we're soft". Yea, I'm a slight guy, myself, wool blankets is some heavy sheit. Maybe I ought to build some muscle and a few callouses. But, Doug said it again, "we're lazy". Well, is that a challenge, Doug? ::grin::

Anna, thanks again for the thread.

cheers,
-Michael

Thanks for posting this Michael.

We were just talking about this on the phone- holy crap, non-internet human contact!

UL/SUL gear doesn't excite me too much anymore either.
I practice it, I've dialed my gear in pretty good…I've seen the light.

Now what?

I guess it's time to start questioning things again.
I'm not too impressed by lighter materials, packs, and pads anymore either.

So what does excite me still?
Deeds and style, not gear.

Doing the JMT with 19th century gear would be SWEET.
Building a backpacking kit out of purely organic materials would be AWESOME. Who cares if it weighs 50 pounds.

So I too have been researching older gear, objects made from durable organic materials, recycled materials. I have some sample gear lists written out and I've been sketching plans for wool blanket sleep systems/ponchos, canvas tarps, etc. We'll see. I guess I'm only limited by time.

I recently saw WWI canvas poncho/tarp that looks just like a Golite Hex when pitched. That's COOL. It's 100 years old and still functional…although you might have to patch a bayonet hole or two. Talk about "sustainable".

Anybody miss the good ol' days of having only one trusty stove, shelter, pack, and bag? I do.
This UL thing sure complicates everything with its "simplicity".
Maybe the wilderness experience I'm looking for has nothing to do with plastic gear from China, but some sort of deeper connection- not just with the land, but also with the origins of my gear.

????

.

"Has anybody done research on the environmental impacts of various types of gear you own? Anybody interested in doing so? A cradle to grave analysis for a single piece of gear?"

Have you?

"Anybody miss the good ol' days of having only one trusty stove, shelter, pack, and bag? I do.
This UL thing sure complicates everything with its "simplicity".

AMEN…

I think Im at the same place as you. After I exhausted all the gear options for UL and know what works for me -whats next?
I know the smell of oil that hits me every time I go into a gear shop always bugged me a little.(being a little factitious). The more I got to know the environment by learning about the wildlife and plants the more you get to know about their uses, the more I learned about traditional skills and gear the more disconnected and over the top the modern gear seemed to be to me. I will always remember the time I went on a short outing with some buchcraft practitioners at a coarse and my foam sleeping pad seemed so out of place and one guy politely started a conversation about the pad that first introduced me to the difference between LNT and displaced impact. Don't get me wrong modern gear can do things only dreamed about before, but for "most" of my uses I think more natural sustainable materials will do just fine and in some cases better.
There is no zero impact gear and trying to find some will be like counting how many angels can dance on the head of a pin- at some point it just becomes absurd and divorced from reality.
Still, I like the idea that my pack comes from a hemp farm instead of an oil field/refinery and my cooking fuel comes from the forest litter and not an offshore drill. And in the end if it doesn't last or get recycled the worst that will happen is that all that gear will become compost.
For me thats the next step.

Now see what you have done, Anna. You have brought about the demise of this entire website. There are people that depend on this site. They need their cuben fix. (psst.. hey buddy can you spare an ounce?)

We're just going to have to rename it to BPE, (Backpacking Environmentatlly) and move on to different materials. Instead of smoking… errr packing… cubens, we'll have to smoke… errr pack… hemp. (I think those are both illegal in the US, right?)

Thanks, guys. I have enjoyed this thread too. A bit of digression, but that is pretty much not preventable. Though probably a good thing that there is a profanity filter on this site….
I agree with you; there are more important things and more exciting things than the latest super-light materials. New challenges to be had; that's why I have picked the environmentally-friendly route. I love that I do not carry a traditionally-laden pack, and I enjoy the enhanced ability to enjoy my surroundings that comes with it. But there is a point when that last 2 ounces (or last 2 lbs) just doesn't matter. I don't feel like doing a Johnny Waterman-style solo traverse or anything, but I feel like sacrificing weight for "green" backpacking (lame, trendy word, but whatever) is a better choice for what is important for the wilderness in the long run.
I currently have one bag w/ a quilt, one pack, one pad, one shelter, one stove, one little pot, one set of hiking clothing, etc. I can't say that it is all nicely organized at the present time, but I can say that it works for me. And it is darn lightweight by any traditional standards. So I can tell you that those good ol' days are pretty sweet. Cheers.

Tom – No.