Topic
Filtering the Colorado
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Home › Forums › Gear Forums › Gear (General) › Filtering the Colorado
- This topic has 35 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by Ian Rae.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Mar 11, 2016 at 6:15 pm #3388439
I am a dinosaur. I still use a Pur (now Katadyn) hiker filter. I have always managed to get a drink from the Colorado through patient use of coffee filters, bandannas, decanting etc before forcing it through my (1 pound?) pump filter. I am looking longingly at these 3oz Sawyer filters but am concerned they are not up to the sediment in the Colorado as they seem to have a reputation for clogging up fast. Anyone have any experience to share?
Thanks.
Mar 11, 2016 at 8:50 pm #3388480You can bring some kind of container to fill with the water and let it sit for several hours or over night. The sediments will sink to the bottom, leaving a cleaner water to filter . It takes more preparation and timing ,but works pretty well.
Mar 12, 2016 at 7:19 pm #3388682I’ve actually gone backwards on weight when it comes to filtering out of brown (silty) desert rivers….ie, I’ve started carrying a heavier filter rather than lighter. Between 1992 and 2010, I either owned or used nearly all the varying pump filters in that kind of water. Between frustrations, breakages, clogs, and complexities….I broke down and bought the beast known as the Katadyn Pocket Filter.
The thought of that much weight killed me…but, for my purposes, the bottom line was that I needed something I could count on…something that was 1) very durable 2) reliable 3) and easy to clean with few parts to loose. That big ol’ tank is a dream…and I think nothing of the weight now (though admittingly, I use it when self-support kayaking, not backpacking). That filter is in a league of its own…in my humble opinion.
Probably not what you wanted to hear…but I wouldn’t even consider, even a tiny bit, taking a Sawyer on those rivers. But that’s just me….on those particular dirty brown desert rivers. You might be able to make one work for you using coffee filters, pre-filters, settling, ect, etc. But at what cost in terms of extra wizmos, weight, time, and patience? I tried those methods with other filters in that type of water. Too much time taken from the reason I like to camp out there: To relax with as few distractions as possible.
When I’m on a trip with clear water, I leave that heavy ol’ Katadyn behind and use a Sawyer Mini. Love it too!
Mar 12, 2016 at 7:26 pm #3388684For taking water from the Colorado River in Grand Canyon…I use a sweetwater glacial silt prefilter and and MSR mini-works. Heavy yes, but totally field maintainable and if the Little Colorado is running, or if taking water within a few miles of Paria Canyon absolutely essential to have the surface area and the ability to clean it.
Mar 12, 2016 at 7:54 pm #3388688Katadyne Vario… my canyon/desert filter of choice…. has a ceramic prefilter that keeps from clogging the main paper filter and is easily cleaned. Also… has an activated charcoal element that takes at least some of the bad taste out of the water if you have to take it from stagnant pools. Yes, weight is about 1 lb… but my experience with those Sawyer mini filters is they clog even in water that looks relatively clear… you put that canyon mud in there and let it dry and it will be an adobe brick… permanent.
billy
Mar 13, 2016 at 2:23 pm #3388860Thanks for all the advice.
I ordered a collapsible bucket and am going to use that to settle the silt out of the river water before filtering with my Pur hiker. More weight not less, but I don’t want to go thirsty down there. Will also try the suggestion of wrapping a coffee filter around the pre filter.
Still have plans to try a Sawyer filter, but I will save that for a mountain trip.
Mar 14, 2016 at 10:28 pm #3389183To speed up settling, use alum powder from the spice isle at your local grocer. It’s a little tricky to get the dosage right (not too much, not too little), but I have had it settle bad Colorado river water in as little as 45 minutes. I’ve also had it not work maybe once or twice for inexplicable reasons.
I carry it dissolved in a little 1 oz bottle and add roughly 10 drops per gallon.
Just another lightweight tool aiding the ever important task of staying hydrated.
Mar 14, 2016 at 10:41 pm #3389186From Wikipedia:
“Alum is used to clarify water by neutralizing the electrical double layer surrounding very fine suspended particles, allowing them to flocculate (stick together). After flocculation, the particles will be large enough to settle and can be removed.”Billy
Mar 14, 2016 at 10:53 pm #3389189I have camped in a few slot canyons in Utah. I have taken a couple of empty milk jugs to let the water settle before filtering, they weigh almost nothing. After settling, I filtered the top 2/3 of the jug. My 2 cents
Apr 22, 2016 at 9:20 pm #3397535Unfiltered spring water on left. Colorado water filtered through paper coffee filter and Pur/Katadyn Hiker filter on the right. Looks funny but tasted fine, I drank more than a gallon with no ill effects.
Apr 23, 2016 at 10:17 am #3397582For the silty Colorado, I favor an “all of the above” approach. So I bring alum, a settling container, aquamira, and a sawyer w/backflushing syringe. The total weight weight is still under 8 oz for all of those things, and it gives me versatility.
If I’m camping at the river overnight I’ll treat a bunch of water with alum, await flocculation, then decant and treat with aquamira. Much easier than messing with any kind of filter.
If I’m at the river in the afternoon, but I need to fill up water for a dry camp that night, I’ll fill up platypus bottles and put alum in them. That way it can flocculate while I hike.
If I’m at the river and want a liter or two for immediate use, I can use the Sawyer. Most of the time that the river looks brown it’s not *that* bad, and you can get a couple liters with the Sawyer between backflushes.
The only thing I’ve been meaning to change is to give Water Wizard a try – it’s a different chemical than alum and it seems to be a better flocculant. I used it on a river trip and my experience was that it was better than alum, but more testing is needed. Either way, the *important* thing is that you use the word “flocculation” and it’s variations as often as possible while treating your water. :)
Apr 23, 2016 at 10:48 am #3397584+1 on the alum. Sometimes you want water in an hour, not overnight.
After any settling, you want to decant the clear water off the top of the container/basin VERY gently.
Removing the sediments helps with any disinfection treatment – obviously, it greatly reducing filter clogging. It also lets UV shine brighter and further through the water. If using chlorine or iodine, those halogens can react with sediments leaving the water under-dosed and potentially not killing the pathogens. After your disinfection period, you should be able to smell chlorine/iodine because our odor threshold corresponds nicely to the target range of halogen concentration (a few parts per million, ppm).
Lighter and smaller than a 5-gallon bucket is a heavy-duty trash bag used to line a hole dug in a sandy beach.
Always settle more water than you think you’ll need. Like two or 3 times as much. It’s so easy to stir up the sediments if you’re not careful in which case you’d like to have already decanted more than enough and/or a second settling basin in reserve.
Feb 14, 2018 at 1:43 am #3518265Has anyone tried using chitosan instead of alum? It is a clarifier (flocculant) like alum. Full disclosure, I am in the chitosan business, but I am also into rafting/backpacking. I am thinking about launching a lightweight, high concentration, low volume (small bottle) product, specifically for this application. Any thoughts? Would this be appealing/useful? Anyone want to try it out if I gave you some samples?
Feb 14, 2018 at 9:28 pm #3518395Joel,
Have a look at a question I asked a few weeks ago –
https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/any-experience-with-pg-water-purifier-packets/
Feb 14, 2018 at 10:15 pm #3518404Alum would be pretty “natural”. It has been dug up for about 2000 years.
Feb 14, 2018 at 10:32 pm #3518407I agree Arthur, didn’t mean to suggest otherwise, but I can see how my wording would seem so.
Feb 14, 2018 at 10:53 pm #3518414And “chitosan . . . its all natural”, except it’s not found in nature like alum is. You have to treat the shells of shrimp or lobsters or crabs with lye to create chitosan.
Which is, of course, not kosher. Literally.
Also, if you’re going to later chemically treat the clarified water, an organic compound will react with (i.e. consume) some of the iodine/chlorine. Which might leave water-borne pathogens under-dosed. And result in some organochlorines. Some examples of organochlorines include dioxins, dichloromethane, chloroform, vinyl chloride, PCBs, carbon tetrachloride and a lot of pesticides that can leave farm workers convulsing in the field if they get crop-dusted. Other organochlorines are some amino acids and flavonoids, so they’re not all nasty toxic compounds, but so many of them are, I wouldn’t knowingly create and then drink them.
So I don’t assess it as “probably a bit healthier”.
But, heck, I’m just a chemical engineer who’s been cleaning up toxic waste sites for 30 years. I’ve never worked in a health-food store or sold herbal supplements at GNC so what do I know?
Feb 14, 2018 at 10:58 pm #3518415Hi David, So you would say the Alum is a better choice then?
Feb 14, 2018 at 11:09 pm #3518420Yup. Alum has been used for many centuries (Pliny the Elder wrote about it) in baking and other applications, so we’ve lots of time to observe any negative effects. It’s very light and almost always effective (in a few cases, bumping the pH of the water helps). Almost the only challenge is finding a small enough container to carry it in.
Feb 14, 2018 at 11:25 pm #3518423So, then, does the Alum not potentially react with or consume iodine or chlorine if treated later?
Feb 14, 2018 at 11:49 pm #3518427Zach. Nothing personal, I just get irritated when ‘natural”, “organic” and other similar words are used today to imply something healthier or better in some way. Totally unscientific and bogus. Last time I checked, “organic” includes pesticides, benzene, DDT, and a thousand other toxic chemicals. “Natural” includes uranium, aflatoxin, arsenic, radon, cigarettes, etc., etc.
Feb 15, 2018 at 12:32 am #3518437Hi Arthur,
No offense taken. I share your dislike for the ways those words are misused in marketing vs science. I guess the difference is I have sort of given up trying to correct it, since they have pretty much taken on new definitions depending on context. I edited my original post (questions), so maybe it can be less irritating now.
I know a lot more about chitosan than Alum but I am pretty sure both of them are safe and effective. I don’t think either of them is sold in its “Natural” form, and I think they are both processed using chemicals that might make them considered “not natural” depending on how you define it. Odds are, we all consume both of them regularly via food and cosmetics, whether we know it or not. Honestly, I don’t think this is the right forum for that debate, or at least not the right thread, but I recognize my mistake of sending us down that road with my original wording. Perhaps we can move on (or discuss it more in a more appropriate forum).
I am genuinely interested in whether or not one of these out-performs the other from a practical, and or safety perspective, and if anyone has actually tried using chitosan (I already know people use alum). Also curious if there is a product on the market, made/packaged for backpackers/rafters etc. now, or if people are just buying the material and repackaging it for their trip (as you mentioned, buying alum in small enough quantities is a challenge. I saw the P&G product, but don’t know whats in it.
Also, my last question was not meant to be argumentative – but rather an actual question, “So, then, does the Alum not potentially react with or consume iodine or chlorine if treated later?”
As a chemical engineer, I would imagine you know a lot about this. That’s what I’m here for. Of course interested in opinions from others as well.
Feb 15, 2018 at 12:59 am #3518447I’ve never heard of Chitosan. It sounds, like alum, it is used in foods so I’m not too concerned about safety.
David, you have concerns with using it in combination with chemical treatment. Do you have any other concerns of experiences with Chitosan? Does anyone know if it works better or worse as a floculent?
Feb 16, 2018 at 9:36 pm #3518767Bumping this as I’d like to see more discussion. As a recent arrival to the Colorado plateau, this subject is right up my alley.
Feb 17, 2018 at 2:44 am #3518819Paul. I think Nick and Dave have it pretty well nailed. I am headed down the canyon in a few days with 3 others. Since we split gear, we will take a Sea to Summit Folding Bucket – 10 Liters and use that with Alum. I decant to another container before filtering or adding halogens. With the lack of rain this year, I suspect alum will not be necessary this trip. For me, I have a pound or two of alum, a lifetime supply, so i will continue to use it. Simple, tried and true, cheap, and crystals, so it is light and simple to carry and mix.
-
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.