LEAVE NO TRACE

[W I S N E R !]

I know who you're talking about. I've been snow camping in Icehouse and had my entire camp, even the inside of my tent, inspected by the same older Koreans in the morning. They throw some pretty outrageous picnics up there, I've been invited to join them once. I'll be damned if I ever turn down homemade kimchi.

In all honestly though, I doubt people would find it so cute and let the behavior off the hook so quickly if it was teenagers blasting rap music instead.

[Earl Gilbert]

I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone taking a dump and leaving it on the trail would think it was perfectly acceptable behavior. Does this person, when at home, go poop on his neighbor's lawns or his city's sidewalks?

Some people really do suck.

[Andy F]

Craig,

In this thread, I've already stated several reasons why I don't like or support LNT.

In essence, LNT is a set of rules inspired by good philosophy, yet devoid of that philosophy. If one follows the philosophy, that is even better than following the rules. It's like telling someone who lives by the Golden Rule, "Don't steal gear from people." It brings things down to a baser level.

It also neglects a crucial opportunity to teach people a philosophy of respect for their environment which permeates all of life instead of just when they step onto a trail.

[W I S N E R !]

When I teach this stuff to high school students, I find it does just the opposite. Rather than neglecting an opportunity to teach a philosophy of respect that extends beyond the trail, I think it opens the door for it.

It would be nice if we were all steeped in a deep and all-encompassing philosophical appreciation for everything around us, but that isn't the case, especially when it comes to humankind's relationship with the wild. Most people are not taught appreciation and respect for it, but taught to fear and/or control it.

Rather than viewing LNT as a fixed and dogmatic set of rules lacking substance, why not approach it as a simple starting point for a conversation that might foster the questions and attitudes that could lead to the very philosophy you're talking about?

[Michael L]

"Same thing with berries. There is a plan. When birds, coyotes or bears eat the berries, they poop them out and disperse berry seeds, part of the natural process to propagate the plant specie."

Wait, so when I eat berries, and poop them out and disperse seeds, it isn't good enough for you Rodger? Talk about a LNT Nazi!!!

;P

[Ian]

"So what's so horrible about LNT?"

Well I can't build my secret forts for starters.

[Kattt]

Nm

[BlackHatGuy]

"When I teach this stuff to high school students, I find it does just the opposite. Rather than neglecting an opportunity to teach a philosophy of respect that extends beyond the trail, I think it opens the door for it.

It would be nice if we were all steeped in a deep and all-encompassing philosophical appreciation for everything around us, but that isn't the case, especially when it comes to humankind's relationship with the wild. Most people are not taught appreciation and respect for it, but taught to fear and/or control it.

Rather than viewing LNT as a fixed and dogmatic set of rules lacking substance, why not approach it as a simple starting point for a conversation that might foster the questions and attitudes that could lead to the very philosophy you're talking about?"

+1

[Kattt]

Nm

[W I S N E R !]

If Ian builds a fort in the forest and nobody knows it's there, is it LNT?

[Nick Gatel]

We need to make it difficult to get into our wild places, and even more difficult to stay there. If people have to earn the right to go to wild places, they will learn to appreciate and live in these wonderful environments.

I say we start with Yosemite.

Here is my plan…

Make it a Federal Offense to maintain any trail. This includes trimming trees and shrubs, or cutting blow-downs on any trail. Let them all go fallow.

Quit building new trails. Building a new trail would be a felony, whether it is an organized project or a single individual.

Ban all domestic animals to include horses, mules, and dogs.

Remove all roads in the Park. This means Hwy 120 first. It does not mean barricade the road, it means remove the pavement, bridges, tunnels and all other improvements.

Remove all roads within 20 miles of Yosemite. This means hikers will have to walk 20 miles to get to any Yosemite border.

Remove all buildings, walkways, bridges, and anything man made.

Clean up the backcountry. Remove trail signs, cairns, and all navigation aids.

Allow no one to operate a business in, to, or out of Yosemite.

Ban all mechanical equipment to include bikes, drones, and helicopters of any kind.

Adjust, jam, or scramble our satellite system to prevent any GPS, radio, microwave, cell, or communication signal from reaching any area of the park.

The only job for any Ranger will be to walk the backcountry and enforce these rules.

[Kattt]

^^^^
Love this ;)

[HkNewman]

Making this too complicated. Read a couple blog posts about PCT thru hikers setting up a camp in the dark only to discover barely covered kwap next to their sleeping area the next morning – not really a folgers moment. Imagine putting ones' own several hundred dollars worth of gear in someone's waste? How about starting with proper waste disposal (the pct recommends "poo stew")?

http://www.pcta.org/2014/time-action-taking-care-poop-16564/

Remember all kwap eventually flows downhill, probably towards human civilization.

Be considerate because what goes around comes around.

[Anonymous]

In some ways, i really like your plan Nick. However, ain't ever gonna happen unless a collapse happens first, as the tourist/parks industry will lose way too much money. Granted, they will be saving more, but the upper up people don't really think in those terms, they think in, or focus on terms of potential revenue and profit. That's one of the few things keeping most of these parks alive and less molested to begin with, the sense that they can be profited off of, and for that, they need to make it easy and typically modern American (a nation of fast food lovers, etc, etc).

So, it's up to us the "consumers" (voters?…) and not the law makers and bureaucrats to make things better. Basic LNT principles are a good place to start.

Btw, regarding LNT in general, i find myself most in agreement with Craig on these issues.

[Michael Gunderloy]

I suspect where you are has some impact on how you perceive LNT. In SW Indiana, I'm not ever getting to untouched wilderness, or even lightly-touched wilderness. I'm camping and hiking on hills that were marginal farms 100 years ago, that were replanted by the CCC 80 years ago, and that still show plenty of evidence of human impact. It's pretty hard to mistake neat rows of uniformly-sized non-native pine trees for a natural forest. In that setting, it's pretty hard to make things WORSE.

[HkNewman]

On the other hand, can't be too prissy. Cows, sheep, horse, and wildlife go where they please. Just human waste is even more of an eyesore and can carry diseases to afflict other humans in addition to giardia and crypto. Again, after setting up a late night camp (which many do), … would anyone here want to wake up on a "deposit" made by a previous backpacker on a 5-day chili n'bean diet?

(I know everyone wants to get all Sunday morning "talking head" political but gotta be graphic sometimes)

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

Dangit Ian!! I told you to not tell anyone about my secret bunker off of Rattlesnake Ridge ;-)

If he hadn't killed his family, that whole bunker thing would have been funny. Good god.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

I have no qualms about foraging. The key is that overall my style of it isn't doing any damage. I don't over pick. Wild food goes bad fast once picked. So you eat as you forage. You can't live on it alone – you don't have enough hours in the day. Once a person goes in a mile or two, few forage. Go in 5 to 7 miles, it is rarely touched. There is plenty by then. In some parks, it is requested visitors eat fruit from old orchards – since if it drops, it attracts rats and more.

I forage often – from the county lands behind my house (I live on a rail to trail) and nosh on blackberries, apples, rosehips, huckleberries and more….to the alpine splendor of berries. Heck, I have no shame – I even urban forage from trees of foreclosed properties and I post to the neighborhood FB page that I will glean trees. I'll even knock on doors if I see fruit dropping on sidewalks and just ask if I can have some. In my old neighborhood I paid teen boys to jump fences at foreclosed homes and pick – with jars of handmade jam.

But don't get me wrong: I am not greedy. When I pick in the wilds I never take more than 1/3 of the berries off each plant, usually less.

And frankly, most people don't know plants well enough to know if they are eating something safe. For example: I don't pick fungi. I don't know enough to be safe. But I can ID berries amazing well. Yet, I have hiked with plenty of people who couldn't believe I ate berries……

[HkNewman]

Plants and even parts will be protected under state and not federal rules unless endangered (was added to various collectors permits back when taking college classes, so a little familiar). I wouldn't think anyone would care about berries for personal consumption though, as there's usually a lot of fruit and most by the trail rots. Check your state regs if concerned – 50 different states , etc.

[Andy F]

Craig,

That's great if the LNT guidelines open the door to a deeper discussion and understanding. I just don't see that happening very often. I can see how it could work with students though.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

Most public lands have rules for personal consumption BTW on the books. For example, at Rainier it is one quart per person, per day. Takes a bit of time to get a quart I can tell you!

Now then, taking things like lichens, moss, leaves and so forth, those things are more regulated due to illegal picking for the florist industry. Very regulated!

[Larry De La Briandais]

"Not a single student has ever belabored the point that leaving NO trace is impossible (metaphor as a teaching tool anyone?)."

Only because I wasn't a student in the class! ;^)

[Diane “Piper” Soini]

It's weird but in the Los Padres when I come across evidence another person has been there–like fire rings or evidence rocks were used to stake a tent, official campsites long since abandoned or evidence of old homesteads–I kind of like it. I also prefer to camp in places other people have camped in. Not only does it feel more homey but it confines the impact. I don't like to see trash. Trash and toilet paper makes me very angry. But a fire ring doesn't make me angry unless there's still heat coming out of it.

[Katherine .]

I think the crux of the debate is "Leave No Trace," is an absolute, heavy-handed, imperative statement.

But face it, as a PSA slogan it's far more memorable than something like: "Try to Leave as Minimal Impact as Reasonably Possible."

[Larry De La Briandais]

The problem I have with LNT is that it is a poor acronym. Many, many people (more than half probably) will never be taught what it means. The only thing they will know is Leave No Trace. Since that isn't possible it becomes something only "radical tree huggers" subscribe to. It is not something for "normal" people.

Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints was better as a single phrase ideal. It is something "normal" people could understand and embrace.

[Author]

Posts