No Place for My Tent

I toss all the branches and rocks and pine cones out of the way.  Maybe kick some dirt around to make a flatter, leveler place.

A lot of people swear by hammocks.

Might take a bit more work to get to section of decomposition that wouldn’t damage the tent or my back. Makes one miss the desert-a good spot ever 10 steps.

I can usually find a spot that’s not too bad

Above treeline there are more good places

It does sound like the perfect place to start hammocking…When I go with my tenting buddies in the hills of PA, I let them choose their tent spots before I pick my hammock trees because I never have an issue finding a place to hang.  I just need two trees roughly 12 feet apart and I’m all set.

PM me if you’d like me to ship you a hammock, tarp, and underquilt to try.  It would only cost you shipping it back after you’ve had a couple of nights (or just one if you really don’t like it) in the woods.

I generally kick loose debris aside (sticks, poop, cones) to clear a spot for my tent, at least the part I’m sleeping on. I suppose this might be a LNT violation.

@Kevin I appreciate the offer. I have always shied from hammocks because of my back. I have lay on a hard surface due to previous back injury.

I have thought about bringing a light folding shovel to work a site I would use in the future, instead of prepping a new spot each time. That seams less impactful.

I get it – I wouldn’t want to take any chances either.  Nice that you can still throw on a light pack and get out there.  Most people don’t know that, with a proper sized hammock, you can lay flat very successfully.

“I have thought about bringing a light folding shovel to work a site I would use in the future, instead of prepping a new spot each time. That seams less impactful.”

I assume that even saying that would cause some people’s heads to explode.

I read a paper by a Forest Service biologist that said if a site is used less than once per year, then it recovers well.  But if a site is used more often it is permanently affected.  Rather than having a bunch of sites that are used a few times per year, it would be better to constrain use to few designated sites that have flat places constructed for tent use.  This would reduce total area impacted.

Another idea was to make the site on a slope.  Use trail building techniques to make a flat place for a tent.    Then it would be more difficult for more sites to be organically created by users.  If a site is in a naturally flat area, then you start getting multiple flat spaces all over and a large area becomes impacted.  And multiple fire rings.

And, they could select the designated sites so they followed all the rules like being 100 feet from a trail and 100 feet from a stream.

I got the idea there was pushback to this – many people don’t want any human development in the wilderness.  Untrammeled by man.

I’m not suggesting we users do this.

As Jerry says, toss the sticks and pine cones aside to make a place for your tent. But when you leave, toss them back. Then get a bagful of pine needles and duff from a place where there’s a good pile and sprinkle it over your campsite.

I had a Thermarest cot. With me being 200 pounds, I didn’t find it too comfortable. I prefer a hammock. I don’t find it hard on the back. Perhaps a tarp and a bivy?

“Then get a bagful of pine needles and duff from a place where there’s a good pile and sprinkle it over your campsite.”

Well…now you’re doubling your human impact. Disturbing another area in order to disguise your tent site is counter productive. there’s a ton of micro-organisms growing in those small piles of needles and duff that take years to form. And they’re a part of the larger eco-system. You don’t simply repair the site that you cleared and slept on by sprinkling needles and duff that you’ve picked up and wrecked from another site.

All that being said…the wilderness is vast. Our little bed down areas are tiny. Fires roar through those same areas periodically, and have for centuries. Deep snows and avalanches, droughts and floods all affect the eco system.  Of course I follow LNT practices, and advocate for them. But our bedding down for the night is small potatoes compared to to all  of this.

“many people don’t want any human development in the wilderness.  Untrammeled by man.”

Ugh. This is such a fantasy and such nonsense. Sorry, but it’s all been trammeled, many times over. Every trail, every park, every place, was used by many prior to our BPL forum generation. And we’re trammeling too.  So really it’s more of an aesthetics question than a purist belief that a backpacker was the only one to ever be there. I’d say if the place you’re pitching is somewhere a lot of other people will also want to pitch, then leave your cleared space for the next person; they’ll appreciate it. If you see one of those, you can use it instead of making a new one. And if it isn’t a place a lot of people go, no one will see it.

Please. Don’t create new campsites. Everybody will see it. Not that it matters if anybody sees it. That’s not the point. We’ve over populated the cities already. Leave some nature for nature. If for no other reason, just for the hell of it. Remember hiking is a hobby. It is not a necessity. We are guests in the deserts and the forests. If we have to rearrange or destroy, we have the privilege of going elsewhere or finding a different hobby. The idea of LNT is a fallacy. We will always leave a trace. However, you do your best because you know no matter what you do, you will leave an impact. Be one with nature. That’s why we’re there. Not to defeat it, but to join it.

there’s the two sides of the argument

where humans frequently go, have “developed” sites that everyone uses.  even though that makes it trammeled.

vs each human returns their site to natural

according to those biologists that studied this, if a site is used more than about once per year, it’s impacted, even though it looks like you restored it to natural, so you’re better off just leaving it developed so the next guy will use the same place and minimize the number of impacted sites

the Wilderness Act is vague.  It says “untrammeled by man”, but an objective of the Wilderness Act is to provide recreation by humans.  So, trails are okay.  Prepared campsites have a much smaller impact than trails.

The percentage area of campsites is tiny compared to the total area of the wilderness.  Those campsites won’t significantly impact plants and animals in the wilderness.

Having a developed campsite visible from a trail will offend the aesthetics of humans walking by. That is also an objective of the Wilderness Act.  So, the best thing would be, for areas frequently used by humans, have the forest service construct sites that minimize impact – have a visible side trail but the site is actually not visible.

At least that’s what those two biologists opined.  I wish I had a link to that article.

Humans don’t “leave nature for nature” anywhere on the planet and never have. If we did, we wouldn’t be hiking there. We use all land in some way or another, even if some of it is preserved for hiking, camping, cutting down trees or grazing cows. And none of us are “one with nature” as we fly in airplanes to get to trailheads. Romanticize it if you want, but when land managers plan and make rules, it’s about what users want to see and experience out there. The drive to build and develop will never stop, which I think was the primary driver behind the wilderness act – stop some of that endless quest for development for monetary gain. Declaring wilderness doesn’t put it back the way it was, or indigenous peoples would go back to having their own lives in these spaces, as they once did.

I’m not offended by a tent next to the trail, as long as they don’t put a guyline across the trail I can trip on (true story). Other humans using the same park I’m using is not offensive to me. I don’t need an illusion that I am the first to set foot somewhere, knowing that the 10,000+ years of human habitation on this continent ensures that I am very much not the first.

LNT is really not about nature; it’s about us – how others use of a place affects the rest of us. Toilet paper flowers would be just fine in most of our public lands; it will biodegrade just fine. But it’s ugly for other users, which is why we have rules and best practices about it (pack it out).

So back to the tent – it’s a judgement call, but you can’t set your tent on top of rocks or branches. So if that spot is your only choice, you have to clear it. My view is somewhat colored by where I live, where there are no established campsites just about anywhere; you have to make a spot wherever you want to pitch. And if it’s a common and logical place to camp, why not leave it for someone else to use, so that they don’t have to clear more space? I don’t advocate site improvement to the point of leaving human made things behind or constructing anything. Although there too – if someone has dragged a log near the site, I’m going to be grateful to sit on it. How far should you go? Judgement call.

indigenous people also trammeled the environment, like burning large areas so huckleberries would grow better

I wish “they” would study plants and animals more.  Determine how big a population you need to be sustainable.  What we can do to keep the population stable.

They’ve done that for grizzly bears.  Determined that they need Yellowstone, northern Idaho, and Canada to allow grizzly bears to travel between.  There are human developments that separate, but they can do things like have ranchers keep gates open to allow grizzlies passage.  Or cover highways with wildlife crossings.

Maybe, flowing from that, there might be some Wilderness policies that would be in order.  They close some places to human travel when birds are nesting.  Wildlife actually uses our trails, so we’re helping them.  That might actually be negative – you have to be open minded.

LNT

To be clear, the area I am referring to is about 60 square miles. It has a network of forest roads, some used quite often, many unused for many decades. The area has very few naturally flat areas. I have hiked almost every hikeable road and trail and excluding roads, the amount of useable sites one could squeeze a tent safely(not counting pull outs on roads) in that was relatively flat, without much prep is 2. These sites are 2′ off one of the main forest roads. Backpacking is not popular in this area, but it’s near my home.

Again, the type of forest here isn’t like the Sierra where you kick a pine cone and it’s good to go. If you were to find a remotely flat spot, the forest floor will have many branches, sticks, intertwined and thick, then needless, decaying bark, pine cones, rocks, etc.

I could set up on an older unused forest road-except these are the main highway for the elk, deer, moose, whatever animals are there. The old roads are about 8-12′ wide. Animal paths right down the middle. Is that ideal? Having a tent next to a high use game trail?

There are slopes that have little growth-few weeds. I have thought about cutting in just enough for a tent. This seems like the least amount of impact.

Regardless of how this post appears, I practice LNT and I don’t think I have hiked once without carrying out others trash that I find. Of course, zero impact would be for me to not hike at all, stay at home, but that’s not realistic or going to happen. I will lessen my footprint as much as I can yet still go to these places as much as desired.

Sounds like a personal decision after factoring everything in. Sounds like something I may have done once. If you’re asking if it’s LNT. I don’t believe it is. It’s not something that I would condone over the internet. To quote an old movie, “If you build it, they will come”.

I don’t think that’s irresponsible Brad

Yeah, I’ve always carried out trash.  For most places, all I ever find are a rubber band or corner of a wrapper.

I remember in about 1972 I filled up a large garbage bag with trash and carried it out.  On the Eagle Creek Trail.  I think things were much trashier back then.  It’s great how LNT has become standard.

Terran Terran – thanks for link.  Good info there.

An exception is the beach of the Olympic Peninsula.  Huge piles of trash.  Washed in with the surf.  Stuff washed off of ships or washed out in rivers.

I mostly ignore that.  My most recent trip there was this guy who was carrying out tires and things.  I picked up all the trash I could find at my site.  Burned some of it.  That guy carried some of it out.  I carried out a little.

@Terran, I understand the concern, but in the area I would ever clear for a tent, again, not talking about making a huge site, just enough to pitch a Plex Solo, Altaplex, etc. I doubt anyone would find it as I wouldn’t choose a place near a trail/road. Idea is to get away from those. If someone at some point did stumble upon it, with the lack of backpackers in the area, they likely wouldn’t use it. But I agree, it’s leaving some trace.

In reality, with so few flat spots, I would bet the cleared area would be heavily used by animals to bed down.

@ Jerry most of the time I find old and new beer cans, shotgun shells. Some of the beer cans are very old, brands I have never heard of. When I had my Zimmerbuilt backpack designed I actually chose the specific material for the side and back pockets to hold up to crushed cans as they cut mesh quite easily.

I think there’s too many factors to make a judgement over the internet. I would think about building out rather than digging in. Prevent cave ins and erosion. Don’t take the same trail twice. They’ll follow you.

Exactly why I started using a hammock. Also, I was skeptical that I would actually like using a hammock over a tent. Twenty years later, I only use the tents when traveling by bike. Any hikes, it is always the hammock.