Following the Rules in U.S. Forests?

[USA Duane Hall]

Max, I'd say as a leader of others which is commendable, I think you should be setting an example. If any of your students found out what you do, they'd be wondering if what you instructed them on may be rubbish. I live on true NF lands out west here, I don't have much restriction on my camping activity. The only restrictions in my area is in the summer when things dry out and campfires outside of established campgrounds are prohibited as is chainsaw use once moisture in fuelwood reaches a certain level. Due to the serious and moral consequences, I'd never do any of that. Maybe what you are doing does not have much consequence. Being a leader demands more of you and it seems you have accepted a leadership role. I'm also of the opinion that some laws are not enforced, just there for Law Enforcement to follow as conditions warrant. Just my opinion.
Duane

[Max Dilthey]

The trips that I lead are very different from the trips I do on my own. On led trips, I always use designated campgrounds and trails- no exceptions. I also never do anything in inclement weather. it's a way to get other college students out in the wild.

That being said, when it's just me and my experienced friends, we'll abide by the "as conditions warrant" principle, but only on rare occasions… stealth camping in Maine is a good example. Set up camp in the dark, no fire, gone at dawn- nobody's hurt, and nobody's the wiser. We're good at selecting spots where there wouldn't likely be a conflict if we were found.

I make my best campsites public, usually. I like to share my experiences. I also advocate for safe practices very publicly, so I can be a good example. I don't hesitate to call myself a role model; the occasional bent rule does not, I feel, influence this.

Plus, I don't want to lose context here; it's not like I'm spending time seeing how I can get away with things. 95% of the time, I'm perfectly within camping restrictions and I'm doing nothing to go against LNT practices anyways. It's just the odd time when we try something creative that I need to think about whether what we're doing is warranted.

[Nick Gatel]

Max,

Calm down :)

I don't know what kind of a response you expected when you started the thread. I don't think you have been around here very long and I could see the train wreck coming right away.

But I would propose you look at your first post, last sentence; "Please, educate us!"

Well some are trying, but it is not their responsibility. This is not about rules, but about a system of values. Values that each individual must determine for themselves. It seems you want someone to tell you what to do, or agree/rationalize your solution.

It has been a long time since I was in college. When I was, Philosophy classes were required and difficult, and we did not have backpacking or similar pursuits as a part of our curriculum.

Maybe it is time to review your course of studies and take some serious classes in Philosophy. You need Philosophy — Then you will never need to ask others what you should do, you will already know what to do — no matter what the dilemma may be.

This is not meant to be critical.

[USA Duane Hall]

Max,
Ah, I see a little more of where you are coming from now. It is a challenge to see how little impact you can have where you camp. Take those students out in inclement weather too then, make them think how to set up a camp and not disturb the earth in an effort to keep dry. I see so many places where trenching has been done and then not covered back up.
Duane

[Max Dilthey]

Nick,

I wouldn't call this a train wreck, not remotely. Also, I know from being on the bicycle camping forums that people are eager to share. My request for education assumed many were ready to share, and I was right!

My education includes environmental ethics and philosophy- my graduate entrance exams reflect a sound education across a broad range of subjects. I appreciate what you're trying to say. Put me in an unknown wilderness, and I will make my own decisions with confidence. However, it helps to know what others expect since it can inform my decisions further.

The way I see it, he who relies only on himself can only go so far. I embrace collaboration.

Thanks!

[Kevin Burton]

I actually agree for the most part that if you LITERALLY leave no trace then you're probably ok. Especially if no one sees you.

For example, I will sometimes camp RIGHT near a parking lot after a long drive to the trailhead. I am a hammock camper too and if I just walk in 200 yards or so I can setup camp and NO ONE will know I'm there. I arrive at 10pm and I'm out of there before sunrise.

That said, there may be secondary reasons why an area is prohibited.

– Unknown dangers. Apparently, though I haven't tested it, the Mendocino area has illegal grow operations in the wilderness that you could accidentally stumble upon. I've heard this from locals which and online but I could see it happening in some areas.

– Wilderness preservation. You could be entering an area which unknown impact. For example, in the Big Sur area there is an endangered salamander and it's location is NOT documented to prevent collectors from poaching them and selling them online. In the bay area some of the trails prevent dogs and people 'break' the rules. I've asked many people why they are breaking the rules and they say "my dog is friendly" not realizing that the real reason is to give the coyotes living space since they use urine to mark their territory.

… just playing devils advocate on these issues. Generally I agree if you are STRICT LNT and you follow the spirit of the rules and are educated you are fine.

[Kevin Burton]

Another issue is where you KNOW the rules haven't yet adapted to the technology.

For example, in some areas of the Ansel Adams Wilderness there are areas that are completely free of firewood due to campers setting fires.

They now have "no wood fire" rules.

However, I have a small EmberLit stove and I do NOT pack in my own fuel. In 95% of the Sierra Nevadas this is fine.

What I do in these situations is I wait until I"m at the *edge* of the no fire zone. Then I pick up LITERALLY 3-4 sticks (like 2' in length), and attach them to my pack…

That's plenty of wood to boil 2-3L of water and I don't touch any of the wood in the no fire zone.

I asked a park ranger what he/she thought of this and his response was "no comment.. " with a wink that I'm probably good.

As an aside, it's AMAZING how little wood a small titanium stove uses…

[Bill Segraves]

Excellent points, Ben. Most of the rules aren't there to prevent the minimal damage that a single backpacker might do. They're there to prevent the damage that 20, 50 or a 100 could and probably would do, even if they're trying to be careful, and even if each them thought that one person won't hurt anything.

Bill S.

[Eric Blumensaadt]

I have stealth camped on the AT in the Shenanndoah Nat'l. Park in a totlly responsible manner,

1. No forest floor disturbance

2. No wood fire (see # 1.)

3. Hidden way off the trail

4. Complete LNT camping

Some Park Rangers are so anal and truly uncaring that they INSIST all backpackers stay IN a shelter even when it is overflowing with bodies. These Rangers stupidly force people to stealth camp.

[Max Dilthey]

I'd rather them be too harsh than too meek, to be honest.

[Kattt]

I am with Justin Baker on this and probably on more.

[James holden]

if you break em its up to you …

just dont get mad should people remind you of it … that is THEIR right after all especially if they are following em …

and dont pout should that nice ranger give you a ticket … you took your chances, and you got caught …

the rules apply to everyone else except for me ;)

[Mike W]

From what I've read you are young and educated. You have been taught some science and some principles in the classroom but now you need "lab time" (get outdoors and observe). At your age, I suspect your lab time (outdoor experience) is still very limited and you are trying to short-cut it by asking questions here… not a bad thing.

I do however, believe that you have to appreciate that the cumulative experience of the people that manage your forests is significant and you may not understand the intent of the rules. The experts may not even understand what has caused damage in an area and are trying to keep people out to allow it to recover because humans are perceived to be part of the problem… at least they are trying!

Preaching LNT is a slippery slope in my mind and your footprints may be invisible to you but figuratively speaking, may have a significant impact on a sensitive habitat. Do you pack out all excrement (including the liquid kind)? I doubt it. Can that have an impact… of course. Washing pots, burning fuels, chemical run-off from treated tarps… who knows the long term impact of even a small amount of these things?

If the environmental folks have concerns for an area that they have watched for a long period of time and decide it needs a break from people, who are you to argue? What do you really know about the area? Try 40 more years of "lab time" and see if you still feel the same about bending the rules.

[Jerry Adams]

I'm with Justin too.

Sometimes I build a fire where it's illegal but there's lots of wood and not very many people.

Sometimes I don't where it's legal but there isn't a lot of wood. The beauty of many places is all the dead wood around.

But I don't fault them for creating rules – they do the best they can

And if someone criticizes me, so be it, and if they want to fine me, whatever…

[Anonymous]

"If the environmental folks have concerns for an area that they have watched for a long period of time and decide it needs a break from people, who are you to argue? What do you really know about the area? Try 40 more years of "lab time" and see if you still feel the same about bending the rules."

+1 Well said, Mike.

[Art …]

Max this thread is not all about you … its all about me !
you see, you may think you have the right to bend the rules to your whim, but I know I do, and so do the thousands who have destroyed the beautiful mountain trail near my home with short cuts, short cuts thru a fragile desert environment to the point where the original trail is unrecognizable.
so stop breaking rules, leave that to me since I'm the one who actually has that right.

[Max Dilthey]

You don't need 40 years of lab time to know that plants underneath two feet of snow are dormant and unharmed. If the environment was that unstable, they'd close hiking up there.

And yes, there's that much snow. We're getting several feet today and more this weekend.

[Mike W]

>> You don't need 40 years of lab time to know that plants underneath two feet of snow are dormant and unharmed. If the environment was that unstable, they'd close hiking up there. <<

Two feet of snow only delays the inevitable… whatever you leave behind with your "LNT" intentions will hit the plants when the snow thaws. But then you will be long gone so no harm done, right?

If you did have 40 years of experience (as many of us do on this forum), then you'd understand that saying something like "they'd close hiking up there" if the environment was unstable is very naive. Environmental concerns have always come second place to the economy and peoples desire to enjoy the environment… even if it means that we enjoy it to death. Those of us that have been wandering through the most beautiful places on earth for decades have watch them slowly degrade over time. Measures might be put in place to try and protect the environment but generally, they do not completely exclude people (but often they should) and the degradation continues.

I'm certainly not a saint and my "young footprints" have no doubt done their fair share of damage in years gone by. Now I just feel sorry for the well intentioned stewards of our forest lands. They are fighting an impossible battle against people that think they know better or even worse, know nothing. I now follow the guidelines as best I can and often wish they would enforce stronger measures.

Re-read Art's post above… he's trying to explain this to you.

I don't think you every really had any intention of listening to what we are telling you but hopefully some of the more open minded Newbs on this forum will take some of this in.

Enjoy your trip. I'm sure your conscience will be clear.

[Paul Wagner]

There's a moral issue, a legal issue, and a technical issue.

The moral issue is in some ways simpler. If you believe that you are really doing a perfect job of leaving no trace, and you can assure us that nobody else sees you do this, then there is no moral issue. You're good. If other people see you, then you have contributed to the problem. No question. They see you do it, they think it's OK…and here we go down the slippery slope. Can you guarantee nobody sees you do this?

On the legal issue, if you are on the other side of the law, you're toast. No exceptions, and no excuses. Pay your fines and be quiet.

The scientific issue is that you believe that you are leaving no trace…and maybe you are. But I have run into so many people in the back country who explain that they don't actually follow the rules because they understand them….yadda yadda yadda…and yet, what they are doing is not only legally but morally wrong. The guy hiking with his son and two dogs in the backcountry of Yosemite—because his dogs are well-trained, and don't chase the wildlife. No comment when I mentioned that his dogs' feces might carry disease, or that fleas on his dog might infect the wildlife. The fact was that he didn't understand all the issues…and thought he was OK. And was showing his son how to break the law.

So I think it's not so much what we here in these boards think of your exceptions concerning the rules. I think you should contact the local naturalist community and ask them what issues they are fighting, and if they think it's OK for you to bend the rules. And you may find out that there are issues about which you are ignorant.

And then you're wrong on all three counts!

[Max Dilthey]

Well, now this thread is just turning into a witch-hunt. I'm not Enemy #1, I'm not even on the list. If I say I practice LNT, there's nothing left behind. I don't leave wrappers, or burnt logs, or toothpaste puddles, or felled trees. I said we follow LNT; you can believe me or assume I'm a child that doesn't know what they're doing.

Secondly, the implication that because I'm not 65, I don't "get it" is insulting and a little childish. If you aren't giving me the benefit of the doubt when I say I understand about human impact and my role in preserving the environment, you're just looking for another college student to pin your concerns on. I really don't feel like being the poster boy for environmental degradation just because I was brave enough to ASK about it.

Thirdly, the conversation about being a role model for others ("Are you really sure nobody will see you?") seems a little extreme for my taste. I take advantage of my knowledge and spread it to others in conversations when I can. I also make sure I'm practicing responsibly around other people.

However, demanding perfection in every second of my life because if I don't, I'm "allowing" other, more reckless people to follow me is WAY beyond my responsibility, in the woods or walking down the street. If someone else takes my actions as a ticket to do serious harm, that's between them and the Forest Service.

If I run down the trail and someone sees me and decides to take his dirtbike on it, is that my fault? I'm all for being a good example, but I give no credence to it being my duty.

I think people who are implying I'm not listening or that I'm not taking no for an answer are not reading my posts. They're just making me into the enemy they want me to be for the purposes of reminding everyone how pissed off they are at the REAL problems. If any one of you hiked and camped with me, you'd have no problems, and I am confident in that.

Relax a little bit!

[Stephen Barber]

Come on, Max, you start a thread by saying, essentially, "Hey! I like to break the rules in the mountains that many of you care deeply about, and spend a great deal of time and money trying to protect – aren't I cool?"

And then you get miffed cuz folks don't think it's so cool after all?

Really?

[Max Dilthey]

Dissenting opinions are always going to make people upset, I guess…

Thank you, Stephen, for capitulating precisely the kind of blind ignorance I'm referencing here. It really is irrelevant how many times I agree with everyone, I'm still going to be condemned for my OP.

Here's the scenario: I ask for guidance, I receive guidance, and I thank everyone and say, very plainly, that my opinion is reformed and that I'm going to follow advice. So what exactly is your problem here?

If it's a laziness thing, I can go back and edit the OP for you…

[Max Dilthey]

Now that I think about it, I guess this conversation is over. I already got all the help I needed. Thanks to everyone who responded in a way that was respectful, since I try to be respectful myself in return.

Everyone else, take a look at what you're doing: you're working your damned hardest to exile an outdoorsman from the community instead of helping them learn how to support it.

[a b]

Yea, i got in "trouble" the last time i entered a thread like this.

This is Back Packing Light.

If you are in the camp that feels the need to build a debris shelter or fire ring every where you go perhaps try the "bushcraft" forums.

Lately we seem to have an influx of these bushcraft folks.

The fact that they don't even follow the #1 rule of survival is hypocritical on their part.

Number one rule: Conserve all resources.

If you are cutting a branch to make a tent pole because you are in an emergency; fine.
If you are cutting a branch simply because you are too lazy to carry a tent pole; not fine.

Same with making fire.

If you are making a fire in a no fire zone because you are afraid of the dark; not cool.
If you are making a fire because you are dying; cool.

What really burns my ass is when folks come on here and pretend they don't know the difference and ask obvious troll questions.

You know the truth in your heart.

You know what is right and wrong.

I am not buying the coy attitude.
There is an agenda being played out here and i ain't buying it.

I will say no more.

[Jake D]

Your understanding of LNT seems shortsighted. It is more than just trash and cat holes. Staying on trails. Camping in designated areas. Leaving an area the way it was before you arrived.

Saying in two threads that you ignore nat/state park rules is not exactly a way to garner support. Many on here have probably witnessed areas with access issues from people with that attitude.
I know ive been to at least one climbing area that is closed because people could not leash their dogs and refrain from being loud near the guest cabins. Owner gave warnings which were ignored so he closed his land.

[Author]

Posts