How Big is Your Footprint?

S

stitchawl

Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
2,849
For many years there was a move towards "Leave no trace" camping. I attended a weekend seminar back in the late 70's that was really eye-opening. After just two night and three days of camping in a virgin area, we inspected each person/groups area after they had packed up, and was really surprised to see just how much impact we had made on the location. We could see well defined trails leading from camp sites to the fire circle caused by Vibram soles of boots, dead compacted areas where tents had been set up, and of course, individual fire pits for many. There were a few people/groups that left no trace though. No open fires, hammocks with nylon strapping so as not to injure the bark of trees, and wearing moccasins around the camp. How about showing a picture of your footprint when camping in the woods?

Footprint2.jpg


Stitchawl
 
I use a Clark Jungle Hammock and tree straps. Othetr than the prints in and out (which even the critters leave) you cant tell I was there. I dont usually use a fire (unless in a sierra stove). So that doesn't show up either.
 
I don't worry about such nonsense. I'm always happy to find a nice fire ring for my use when I arrive at my destination.
 
I don't leave all that much of a footprint but I don't hesitate to have a fire (provided I can be confident I will not cause a forest fire!)

I camp under a tarp and I usually move on after one night anyway, so not enough time to kill much plantlife.

I do think that the whole "leave no trace camping" movement tends to be reliant on the "leave massive, destructive, permanent trace factories in the third world" movement, though. I would rather see a person leave a black mark on a rock than bring a petrochemical-fuelled stove built in a factory in Thailand to heat a pre-cooked meal in a thick, single-use plastic bag.
 
misanthropist said:
I would rather see a person leave a black mark on a rock than bring a petrochemical-fuelled stove built in a factory in Thailand to heat a pre-cooked meal in a thick, single-use plastic bag.
Click to expand...

I was going to make a similiar point. Who did more to hurt the environment: the guy that brought in his stove/fuel, wiped his ass with paper and put it in a plastic bag and put in the landfill; or the guy that cooked over an open flame using fuel from the area and wiped his ass with a rock or grass.

Think globally.

By the way, I do believe Leave No Trace absolutely has its place, particulary in the desert and National Parks where areas get a high volume of people that would deplete resources.
 
I know if encountered a guy wiping his bum with a rock, I most definitely would not confront him about the shape of his campsite :)

Those are some good points misnathropist. I tend to take a bit of a moderate view myself. I agree that individual impact is proportional to the traffic encountered in an area. Where there is lots of traffic, the need to step up measures to ensure as little impact as possible becomes paramount. Other places requires less concern.

I think the whole 'mantra' of leave no trace for the sake of leaving no trace itself is kind of silly, gaia talk. Yes we all love our mothers and should care of nature. But the death of a sapling here and there or two square meters of sedges is not going to bring the ecosystem to a stand still.

I am adamant on garbage though. What gets humped in should get humped out, including biodegradables (orange peels and such). That also includes cigarette butts. A personal pet peeve is finding cigarette butts all over a former campsite. Thats just in bad tast. Oh - and don't burn your cans. Dammit - they wont fully burn. Just take them back with you - they are a lot lighter without their ravioli in 'em.
 
Quiet Bear said:
[SNIP]
By the way, I do believe Leave No Trace absolutely has its place, particulary in the desert and National Parks where areas get a high volume of people that would deplete resources.
Click to expand...

Not only resources for people...
I remember camping one weekend in California, near a large lake up in the mountains. It was a pretty popular spot as it was easy to approach by car. Although quite forested, there wasn't a stick of wood on the ground for two miles around the lake and even most of the dead leaves and needles had been scrounged to bare ground. It had all been picked up by campers making fires.

This was some years ago. I'd guess that today most of those trees are dead. Trees need food too, and the dropped decaying limbs, leaves, and needles return nutrients to the root systems of the trees. No dropped limbs to decay means no nutrients for the trees to continue life. Compacted soil means little water can penetrate to the root systems. This is why so many State and National forests require campers to use only pre-established camp sites, often with a 'no open fire' rule in place. In the Presidential Range of New Hampshire, you can only camp below timberline, and often only on established tent platforms. Other areas of New England require that you be 100 yards off an established trail if you want to pitch a tent.

In the Green Mountains of Vermont there is often a Ranger stationed at various points above timberline to insure that people only walk on the trails and don't damage the fragile ecosystem of the alpine tundra areas of the krumholtz zone. Although much of the area is covered with what looks like grass, it is actually sedge that takes dozens of years to grow to 2"-3" and can be killed off by a Vibram sole playing frizzbee at a lunch break!

I like a nice fire at night myself, but there is a time and a place for it, just as there is a time and place for low-impact camping. Cooking marshmallows over a Svea just doesn't feel right. :)

Stitchawl
 
I've said my peace on the subject in other threads, but I can say that I would have barely a fraction of the interest in the outdoors that I currently have if rules like the above-mentioned were in place everywhere.
 
I do my best to make my impact light. I pack out what I pack in, don't make my spot look like the new bear food pit, and I will pick up other junk too. I don't however, treat the woods with such reverance that I worry overmuch about footprints or some matted grass.
 
stitchawl said:
Although much of the area is covered with what looks like grass, it is actually sedge that takes dozens of years to grow to 2"-3" and can be killed off by a Vibram sole playing frizzbee at a lunch break!
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder how these things survive ice scour and herbivore browsing.
 
kdstrick said:
I don't worry about such nonsense. I'm always happy to find a nice fire ring for my use when I arrive at my destination.
Click to expand...


So you like to camp in camp grounds? If I'm in the middle of the woods somewhere and I see lots of evidence of a camp somewhere I can hardly feel I'm in a remote place. I guess if you spend your time in tourist traps you can feel this way.

If you actually like to enjoy the wilderness for what is it then can't imagine why you would not support leaving no trace.
 
Wow i sure am glad i live in a place with more bears than people.

So long as you are not in one of those tiny wilderness parks inside a huge population centre you can be reasonable about what you do. human beings are just as much a part of the ecosystem as any other animal. The "leave no trace' guys tend to forget that. Hunting and gathering food from the forest is actually good for the forest done within reason.

In a health forest it does not take long at all for the it to devour a campsite. i bury my feces and other biodegradables and pack out anything plastic but I also don't mind chopping down a few tees and gathering berries ,bark etc. If you have ever lived on the edge of a real wilderness you would know just how hard it is to keep it back from your homestead.

If you guys ever get a chance to see the Canadian shield area up just north of where i live in Northern Sask definitely do it. The lake I used to live on called Lac la Ronge is so big you can't see across it and it has tides. There is very little topsoil which is why it is called the shield. It was all scraped away by glaciers which makes for some very beautiful landscapes, great fishing and hunting and no people.
 
If people were really concerned about "leaving no trace" they would commit suicide.

That way they would never leave a trace again and mommy earth would be all better...

Seriously folks...ever see a dry forest after a lightning strike? Now that's a footprint...Nature has always ravaged herself and healed.

If my 8.5 double EE vibram is causing that much concern someone needs a valium.

No, I'm not advocating misuse or abuse of land and certainly there is an element that has no business even entering the woods. But the planet will certainly recover just fine when they're gone.
 
Anyone concerned about leaving a trace should not be in the woods.

When I go camping. . .
I chop down several dozen trees and build a log cabin, then burn it when I am done.

Screw Vibram soles, I wear old fashioned lead diver's shoes and stomp all plants dead. Killer workout too.

Afterward I scream "Take that, Mother Nature!" while flipping birds with both hands as hard as I can.
 
Well...

Personally, I like to take a case of beer (or two) with me when I go out camping. I, too, like to have a nice campfire, roast some dogs, and take a crap in the woods.

HOWEVER: I camp in designated spots, pack out my trash (and recycle the cans), and bury my poop when I'm done.

I suppose this makes me public enemy #1 in some people's minds. But I have never lost any sleep over it.
 
Idaho Jarhead said:
Well...

Personally, I like to take a case of beer (or two) with me when I go out camping. I, too, like to have a nice campfire, roast some dogs, and take a crap in the woods.

HOWEVER: I camp in designated spots, pack out my trash (and recycle the cans), and bury my poop when I'm done.

I suppose this makes me public enemy #1 in some people's minds. But I have never lost any sleep over it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much sounds like what I do, although I didn't see any mention of rye and coke, vodka and orange juice, peach schnapps and orange juice....................:(

I only offer the following because I had a horrible week and I'm muddying up the memory of it with a few beers, but one problem people have is what to do with their toilet paper. Here's what we do - we pack along some brown paper bags. In these we throw the used tp, interspersed with some Birch bark and other flammables. After the other people have gone to bed, we burn them up on the campfire (after we remove the baked potato, of course). It gets rid of the waste without burying something that will take considerable time to decompose, and we don't have to pack it out with us (when that happens, I stay out of the woods :()

Doc

I say 'we' but it really is done on an individual basis. :)
 
There was a period of time when all of the active preservation societies (Sierra Club, etc.) were trying to get Vibram soles out of the woods. If you've ever spent time re-building heavily used trails, you'd probably feel the same way. Along most of the larger trails, i.e. The Appalachian Trail, The Long Trail, The John Muir Trail, sections are constantly re-routed to allow the forest to heal and restore itself. Sections of steep trails have had log or cement steps put in because the boot tread damage was leading to so much soil erosion that tree that had been standing for years were no longer getting support from the ground and tipping over! This is NOT a problem for the forest. It's a problem for the hiker who is under the tree when it falls. :)

Obviously if you camp in remote wilderness areas this is NOT a problem and there is little need to worry. The earth does heal, but only if man lets it do so. However when 750 people walk the same trail every day during Autumn to see the view from the top of Mt.Somewhere because it's only a 30 minute hike from the trail head, that trail is going to get some severe damage that isn't going to heal without the help of the trail crew moving the trail over several steps to the left or right. Unfortunately, a lot of heavily used trails don't have the needed manpower to do trail maintenance. Nobody thought much about acid rain damage 50 years ago. Most of us have seen the results of it today.
Hell, even the old Boy Scout manual from the early 60's was still advocating bough beds. I used one when I was a kid and can state clearly that they ARE a delight. But at what cost to my kids? Or your kids? Maybe there are enough fir trees in the Upper Peninsular or in the Smokies for everyone to make their own bough beds, but there isn't in New York State or in Ohio.

How much impact we make on our environment will vary from location to location. If you're all alone in 100 sq miles of wilderness you can follow different guidelines than if you are walking the Appalachian Trail in New Hampshire and passing people every 10 minutes during the day. It doesn't take much to keep the forests healthy. It just takes some caring.

Stitchawl
 
Being born and raised in Boy Scouts, I was always taught the "leave no trace" rule. We would pack in all of our stuff, and pack out everything with the exception of toilet paper. I'm the kind of person that for some odd reason, doesn't crap in a 6" hole in the ground, my system shuts off and I don't go unless I see the porcelain express (or wooden "U" shaped out house).

I wouldn't go so far as to worrying about leaving footprints in the campsite, but I do pack out everything that I bring in.

Now the woods just doesn't feel like the woods if you aren't allowed to make an open fire. Luckily here in South Texas, there is plenty of beachfront to do whatever you want for as long as you want, just bear in mind the sand and saltwater getting everywhere.

Leave no trace can be taken to extremes, but a little too much worrying just takes the fun out of camping. Start the fire, pull out some jerky and clean the fish, 'cause it's real camping time :D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top