rethinking LNT?

[Chip]

I have seen this taught as "absolutely not... the mice feed on the antlers and that's where they get calcium from."

Lordie, I wonder how our CT mice survive !

Regarding fires; I like a blazing fire as much as anyone but I do agree with the "no fire" rules on the AT in CT. 30 years ago the woods were stripped clean inside of 200 yards from the trail, freaking people wood strip green wood off trees and aged wood from lean-tos for a fire. It was out of control.

Don't get me going on the LNT "visual impact" rules though.

 

[Tom Rankin]

I respectfully disagree that if you find artifacts they are yours to keep. I now live and hike in areas where it's not uncommon to find artifacts (pottery shards, arrowheads, mortars, etc) when you're hiking. The ethic of the people I hike with is not only to leave it, but hide it slightly so that others will be unlikely to find it. One of the reasons for doing this is that there may be an archaeological review of that area at some point, and the location and type of artifacts will be very useful in that review.

Would anyone have an archeology review of an area right along a trail, knowing that artifacts WILL be taken if in plain sight? If you are referring to off trail travel, then what are the odds the archaeologists will survey the area you went to?

I was on a summit last summer and threw my banana peel over the edge of the cliff face. By the reaction of those around me you would have thought I committed a crime!

Wellll.....

I don't know where you were, (perhaps it was a remote, seldom visited sight), but at the firetower I volunteer at, someone once threw their banana peel into the woods. I asked him if he thought it would be ok for the hundreds (perhaps 1,000's) of people who visit the tower each year to throw their trash into the woods. He fished it out and kept it.

 

[McRat]

LNT is essentially distilling an entire philosophy to a bumper-sticker friendly slogan. While the phrase 'Leave No Trace' does capture the spirit concisely, it leaves little room for nuance, and plenty of room for zealotry.

I wish they settled on 'Minimize Impact', as most folks could agree with this both on and off the trail.

I strive towards the ideal of LNT, and keep learning better ways of doing so - but our impact is inevitable. The only surefire way to 'Leave No Trace', is to practice 'Do Not Visit'.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

As much as I enjoy reading Neil's stories, I think that, for the purposes of this discussion, campfires are those located/visible in proximity to a hiking trail.

I remember several years ago doing a winter hike up Airline, and overtaking a couple of fellows. As I recall, they were from "away" - maybe Chicago - and it was obvious they were looking forward to camping above treeline and having a big fire. It was clear they had planned it for a long time, and it was going to be a highlight of their trip. As tactfully as possible I pointed out that both activities were illegal, but it didn't seem to have much of an impact. That spring I scoured the area looking for evidence of a fire, but never found it, so for whatever reason I don't think it happened.

Remoteness is relative. Before moving to the Eastern Sierra I thought it was very remote as things like gas stations can be 50-100 miles apart, etc. Now that I live here it seems just the way it should be ...

 

[sleeping bear]

LNT is essentially distilling an entire philosophy to a bumper-sticker friendly slogan. While the phrase 'Leave No Trace' does capture the spirit concisely, it leaves little room for nuance, and plenty of room for zealotry.

I wish they settled on 'Minimize Impact', as most folks could agree with this both on and off the trail.

I strive towards the ideal of LNT, and keep learning better ways of doing so - but our impact is inevitable. The only surefire way to 'Leave No Trace', is to practice 'Do Not Visit'.

I totally agree. Leave No Trace is like 'stop global climate change now", it's virtually impossible and presents an unattainable ideal to those who are asked to follow it. Minimize impact is much better. Often when I teach LNT that's the response I get, "well, we're going to leave some trace".

Sombody touched on the connection bit a while back too. Gosh, I think back to the things I did as a kid, the things that really gave meaning to the outdoors- like collecting all kinds of rocks, leave, bones etc. I also learned my lessons about nature the hard way. I remember cutting down a whole bunch of trees to build a fort and then being so ashamed of what I had done. I never told my parents about the fort so they wouldn't see the tree stumps.

Valuing nature and the earth is something each person has to learn on their own. I guess this thread is a product of my frustration with thinking I could teach people LNT in 20 minutes before a trip. If you don't have the values to go with it, the principles are just more rules. I'm just wondering if since the inception of LNT in the early 90s and currently with all of the other stuff going on (think Last Child in the Woods) if LNT doesn't need a new approach. Not new methods necessarily, but a new something (??).

 

[Nessmuk]

I respectfully disagree that if you find artifacts they are yours to keep.

Oh, I never said that. I only said that if I "leave it alone for others to enjoy" then it would certainly be gone in short order. I agree with masking them in place.

In a real case, with friends I did come across pottery shards while bushwhacking to a newly found Adirondack cave (really a cliff-base boulder field forming a number of shallow protected "caves"). The NYS Museum was contacted, verified their authenticity, and removed them because sooner or later they would be discovered and plundered. By the way, the archival photographer of the NYS Museum is a LNT Master Educator and the NY State Advocate for LNT.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

...I guess this thread is a product of my frustration with thinking I could teach people LNT in 20 minutes before a trip. If you don't have the values to go with it, the principles are just more rules. I'm just wondering if since the inception of LNT in the early 90s and currently with all of the other stuff going on (think Last Child in the Woods) if LNT doesn't need a new approach. Not new methods necessarily, but a new something (??).

Before you become too discouraged about your efforts in teaching LNT, you might consider whether teaching it just before a hike is the appropriate time to do it.

As the public becomes more conscious of the impact we have on our environment, and can see within their lifetime the retreat of glaciers, extinction of species, and other dramatic effects of our impact on our physical world, then LNT is simply a variation on that theme. Consider teaching it in a more formal setting, where people have an opportunity to discuss the concepts of LNT, and include practical scenarios of what seems appropriate/inappropriate practices.

There will always be people who chuck their orange and banana peels along the trail, build fires, walk on diapensia, pull up krumholtz because it will look good over the mantle, etc, and it's unlikely you or anyone else is going to change that. But, there's lots of people who will "get it" once they're exposed to LNT ideas. Focus on them, and don't measure your effectiveness based upon the clods of the world.

Edit: Nessmuck - am very glad you clarified your position on artifacts.

 

[Nessmuk]

I have to say that of all the LNT principles, the concept of a campfire is the one I personally find disappointing. I don't camp, don't have a stove, and so it hasn't affected me yet, but I can say that if I went camping, especially with my family / kids, the idea of a campfire is very appealing and I would find it hard to explain to them why we shouldn't make one. "No guys, let's toast marshmallows over my JetBoil blue flame..."

I don't think you quite have the concept. Nowhere does LNT say "campfires are forbidden". It only says to think about if you really need to have a campfire, where you might consider to have a campfire, and if you so decide, how you can apply techniques to minimize it's impact. Again, if you take the time to look at more than just the surface you will find that the LNT principles are only guidelines designed to get you thinking, not hard and fast regulations.

Here is the summary of that LNT guideline:

MINIMIZE CAMPFIRE IMPACTS
- Campfires can cause lasting impacts to the backcountry. Use a lightweight stove for cooking and enjoy a candle lantern for light.
- Where fires are permitted, use established fire rings, fire pans, or mound fires.
- Keep fires small. Only use sticks from the ground that can be broken by hand.
- Burn all wood and coals to ash, put out campfires completely, then scatter cool ashes.

What part of the above do have issue with?

I'm not saying to not have a campfire with kids either, but if you've never tried it, it can be a completely new experience to enjoy the night in the open air by candlelight. You will see and hear things of the night you would never experience with a roaring bonfire.

 

[Oldsmores]

[/QUOTE]...Regarding fires; I like a blazing fire as much as anyone but I do agree with the "no fire" rules on the AT in CT. 30 years ago the woods were stripped clean inside of 200 yards from the trail, freaking people wood strip green wood off trees and aged wood from lean-tos for a fire. It was out of control...[/QUOTE]

Like a lot of rules, this points out the sad fact that many humans are just not too bright. A small fire made from dead wood has a pretty small overall impact on the wilderness, even if repeated by thousands of hikers. The problem is that many hikers will build their fire anyway, even if there's no dead or downed wood available, by ripping up live trees or dead structures. The LNT fire guidelines that Nessmuk posted would prevent the kind of damage described if everyone followed them, and were prepared to forego their fire if they couldn't. Sadly, that won't happen, so the alternative is to ban fires altogether.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

- Campfires can cause lasting impacts to the backcountry. Use a lightweight stove for cooking and enjoy a candle lantern for light.

What part of the above do have issue with?

The part above where it says use the stove and candle.

I never said "issue". I try and minimize my impact on the earth as much as possible in my daily life. There is something "Norman Rockwell" if you will about camping and having a campfire which is at odds with my desire to LNT.

We love having a fire in our fireplace but it's a lousy spec house job and doesn't draw that well and so we don't use it much because the house gets smoky, and it throws off the thermostat which controls the rest of the house making everywhere but the standalone family room too cold.

Tim

 

[Nessmuk]

The part above where it says use the stove and candle.

If you read beyond the first line, in particular if you go ahead and read the full text of the guideline on the web page, you should be able to realize that "use a stove and candle" is NOT A DIRECTIVE, only an alternative to consider.

 

[timmus]

Gosh, I think back to the things I did as a kid, the things that really gave meaning to the outdoors- like collecting all kinds of rocks, leave, bones etc. I also learned my lessons about nature the hard way. I remember cutting down a whole bunch of trees to build a fort and then being so ashamed of what I had done. I never told my parents about the fort so they wouldn't see the tree stumps.

Little judgment is usually enough to maintain. No massive destruction, no major improvment, just keeping it OK.

And yes, kids can really learn that stuff. Adults ? I have doubts, sorry.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

If you read beyond the first line, in particular if you go ahead and read the full text of the guideline on the web page, you should be able to realize that "use a stove and candle" is NOT A DIRECTIVE, only an alternative to consider.

Peace, man. I've read it. I understand it. I'm merely of the opinion that having a fire is more impactful than not and while I would prefer one from an aesthetic perspective, the tread lightly person inside of me prefers not to. That's all.

Tim

 

[Tom Rankin]

Peace, man. I've read it. I understand it. I'm merely of the opinion that having a fire is more impactful than not and while I would prefer one from an aesthetic perspective, the tread lightly person inside of me prefers not to. That's all.

Tim

Perhaps a small fire on a weekend camping trap is LESS destructive to the environment than keeping your entire house warm all weekend, burning fossil fuel!

 

[cushetunk]

Perhaps a small fire on a weekend camping trap is LESS destructive to the environment than keeping your entire house warm all weekend, burning fossil fuel!

This is almost certainly true. But LNT is not about overall protection of the environment. In fact, I would hazard that in terms of a person's overall environmental impact, LNT is nada, zip, absolutely irrelevant.

On the other hand, LNT is eminently practical if we wish to preserve wildness in areas that are 1) heavily traveled or 2) very slow to erase signs of human travel.

In my mind, the trick to properly applying LNT is to recognize which, if either, oft those categories your location falls in, and why.

 

[trailbiscuit]

Leave No Trace is like any other religion : you can be mellow about it or be a fanatic.

It's not LNT that is going too far, just some annoying believers.

I couldn't agree more. I think we would all agree the basic notion behind LNT is a good one: protect & preserve the forests, mountains, rivers, etc. It's the application of that notion that causes issues and the delivery by some of the more vocal zealots. It's been said a couple times in this thread, the only true way to practice LNT is not visit anywhere.

That being said, I practice LALTAP...Leave As Little Trace As Possible.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

What is the actual issue with tossing biodegradable garbage like apple cores and banana peels? The latter do not break down as fast as the former, but eventually are gone. Most cyclists would never toss a foil power par / gel packet and many will stop if one is accidentally dropped. Most think nothing of tossing a banana peel or apple core.

Is it because the item is not native?
Is it because nobody wants to see them while they degrade or get scavenged?

I toss the same items in the compost pile and either they get scavenged by the local critters or turn into a nice fertilizer for the following year.

I personally don't find tossing an apple core off the trail offensive, but I don't make a habit of it either. I do routinely collect wrappers and water bottles when I find them, which is thankfully quite rare. Much more common (along with butts) on the smaller, more crowded mountains.

Tim

 

[Neil]

On the other hand, LNT is eminently practical if we wish to preserve wildness in areas that are 1) heavily traveled or 2) very slow to erase signs of human travel.

If it requires LNT then I'm not interested in going there.

I agree with Groucho!

 

[griffin]

What is the actual issue with tossing biodegradable garbage like apple cores and banana peels? ...

Is it because nobody wants to see them while they degrade or get scavenged?

From the LNT session I took part in, I think that is the issue - that particularly in high-traffic areas, the "odd apple core or banana peel" turns into a trash-pile.

The way the guidelines have been explained to me is that LNT is a way to think about how you can reduce your impact on the environment AND reduce your impact on your fellow hikers (and vice versa).

Interestingly, LNT principles have never seemed so rigid to me as some of their opponents in this thread. There is irony in complaining about inflexibility while refusing to consider your own behavior and actions.

 

[sleeping bear]

There are several arguments with banana peels and apple cores being tossed in the woods. One, essentially it's litter. Two, it may be non-native which might particularly be a problem if it still contains seeds. Three, animals may find and eat it which then it doesn't matter what kind of food it is, just that it's food and wild animals are eating it. Four, if everyone threw their fruit trash in the woods what would happen?

That being said, I've seen orange peels along ski trails. Little neon orange pieces all over the white snow. That made me mad.

But what is the altenative? Are you going to take that banana peel home and put it in the trash so it can wind up in a landfill? Tough question.

Maybe the best method would be to dig the banana peel a cathole.

I've resigned myself to eating the entire apple (core, seeds, and all) so I do not have to decide what to do with it. I don't eat bananas in the woods.