Topic
Drinking out of lakes vs snow melt/running water
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Home › Forums › General Forums › Philosophy & Technique › Drinking out of lakes vs snow melt/running water
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Jun 13, 2012 at 12:03 pm #1290999
Hi,
Last time we were in Emigrant Wilderness, we found ourselves filtering and drinking more out of lakes than snow melt or other sources of running water. Sometimes I felt a little strange about drinking from a water source that served as a swimming hole for eager-to-be-refreshed backpackers (who were no doubt covered in sun screen and deet) or as a drinking hole for horses who took dumps at the edge of the lake.
Is there something to be concerned about here, or am I just being paranoid?
Thanks,
rhz
Jun 13, 2012 at 12:33 pm #1886585Filtering is the key phrase in your post. :)
As long as you filter, you are probably going to be just fine.
We drink untreated snow melt from fast flowing streams in the PNW all the time, and I have only been sick once when I was a teen. I suspect that was a hygiene issue, as I look back at it now.
We just try to be certain that the stream isn't one that crosses the trail further up, in which case it gets treated.
K
Jun 13, 2012 at 3:30 pm #1886637Be sure where that runoff is coming from if you don't filter. I recall pumping away at a stream when a tromp of packers all dunked their nalgenes to fill up right where I was pumping from. Not even 400 feet up, the trail crossed the stream a second time but this time it was flowing through fresh horse manure.
Jun 13, 2012 at 5:57 pm #1886688think of filtering as " insurance"
If you filter . .you're covered
If you don't you betting on .. " I'm safe"
Jun 14, 2012 at 8:32 am #1886859Hi,
Thanks for the responses. I'm also wondering whether it's possible that the concentrations of deet and/or sunscreen would present a health risk. Presumably the filter would not address chemical contamination of this type.
thanks,
rhz
Jun 14, 2012 at 9:44 pm #1887094likely less in the extremely dilute amounts (likely totally non-detectable) than the health risk from rubbing it on your skin.
Jun 28, 2012 at 6:35 am #1890758I prefer running water where available, because it's oxygenated by the tumble over rocks and such. I still filter for bugs and to cull out the flecks of dead moose flesh, etc…
Aug 18, 2012 at 1:51 pm #1903775Youve carried the filter why not use it. Ghiardia in the backcountry would be misserable. Every lake gets filled somehow. I look for the source because it tastes better, If it is just snow melt and the source is gone just filter and drink. Water is something that I enjoy when I am out in the backcountry so I look for the best sources and load up
Aug 18, 2012 at 2:27 pm #1903779I've read that the red stuff (Chlamydomonas nivalis, "watermelon snow") growing in old snow is not good— and never wanted to be the test dummy to verify that. It came to mind when talking of snowmelt into a small tarn.
Filter if you have a filter, or boil, or treat with chemicals. Being a Technicolor fountain far from home is never good.
Aug 19, 2012 at 2:44 pm #1903958Pardon what must sound like a fantastically stupid question, but I have to ask: so, is it more important/advisable to filter, or to treat, or must one do both?
Aug 19, 2012 at 4:00 pm #1903975Harrison, there are different risks in the water in different places, so you want to treat your water properly depending on the risks for your area. In some places, the risks are best removed by filtering. In other places, the risks are best removed by chemical treatment. In still other places, UV light might work good, and boiling nearly always works. There are a few places where I do not treat water at all, but these are generally right where the snow patch is melting.
–B.G.–
Aug 19, 2012 at 5:10 pm #1903990Thanks, Bob. I've always operated under much the same principles, but the more I read about backcountry water the more confused I get.
In my pre-UL days, I carried a PUR filter/purifier. I've been trying to learn how to effectively use chemical treatments and UV light; both, of course, have no "filter" in the system. That's made me wonder just how necessary it is to pre-filter water before treating it with, say, AquaMira or a Steripen. Believe it or not, it's been difficult to find clear statements about it.
Aug 19, 2012 at 5:31 pm #1903993Nearly all treatment systems will get some benefit from pre-filtering the water before your main treatment. But that may or may not be necessary.
Most UV light treatment works poorly in dirty/turbid water, so that is one case where pre-filtering should help. In fact, if possible, let the raw water stand in a container. After just a few minutes, glacial silt and similar crud will settle out to the bottom. Then just treat the top 90% of the raw water that is clear, and you've already made some progress.
–B.G.–
Aug 19, 2012 at 6:17 pm #1904001I stopped carrying treatment a few years ago. just pull all my water from moving water up here and i havent gotten sick. seen plenty of people carrying filters and somehow getting sick probably because the dont wash there hands or improperly prepare food.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Our Community Posts are Moderated
Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting.
Get the Newsletter
Gear Research & Discovery Tools
- Browse our curated Gear Shop
- See the latest Gear Deals and Sales
- Our Recommendations
- Search for Gear on Sale with the Gear Finder
- Used Gear Swap
- Member Gear Reviews and BPL Gear Review Articles
- Browse by Gear Type or Brand.