Minimalist camping without a fixed blade

pinnah said:
Could you explain what anything the LNT crowd has said that makes you feel bad.

The only thing we've said is that fixed blades aren't needed for safe backcountry travel. For the life of me, I don't see how that could you or Quiet or Carl or anybody feel bad.

Seems to me that if there is any intolerance being expressed, it is by the pro-fixed blade crowd, some of whom (not you) insist that a fixed blade is required.

I'll concede that machetes (a fixed blade knife?) make some forms of camping easier. They certainly make travel through some terrain easier or even feasible in the case jungle like conditions.

But really, LNT techniques are utterly proven. Saying that doesn't force people to use them (although local regs might).

Its been a curious thread. There's something very deeply held by some fixed blade advocates that make hearing that their preferred camping tools and techniques aren't universally needed.

But, I suppose that if the pro-fix crowd had all taken your posture of "Fine, they aren't needed but they're fun and I like them so I carry them" approach then the thread would've ended in raging agreement on the 5th page.
Click to expand...

Pinnah, serious question for you. You keep making statements to this effect. "Utterly proven". What does that mean? How were these specific Leave No Trace techniques proven? What did they prove? That you can take a pack with some things in it, and camp and hike, leave the area like you found it, and come home at the end? Because hell, that's a pretty low bar. People, hunters, campers, hikers, outdoorsfolks, and heck, Boy Scout troops do that very thing every weekend all over the country. Do you think they are all using those specific techniques outlined in those fancy books you've read by those super experts who've written those books? What makes those folks super experts? That they went camping or hiking or climbing and lived to tell the tale and write about it? By that measure everyone who has camped and had a great time is an expert.

Are all those outdoorspeople who go out, and enjoy nature and camp, hunt, fish, hike, canoe, go boating, rock-climbing, skiing, every weekend, are they all somehow "doing it wrong"? I'm genuinely curious. Objectively, I already have the answer, but I'd like to know what rationalization you are using for your assertions made in this thread. Because I gotta say, I'm kinda drawing a blank on how sleeping on platforms that were put in an outdoor spot, reached by hiking along a trail that was cut into an area and maintained can truly be considered "LNT". I mean, unless you're telling me that those things were put there by Mother Nature? That well worn trail was always there, and those platforms aren't what they actually are, a manmade campground stuck on the side of that manmade trail? Or is that what LNT means for you? "Leave No FURTHER Trace after we've already sorted this area out to make it amenable to folks looking for a small taste of the outdoors"? What is the actual definition we're using here?
 
Last edited:
I will say that the leave no trace folks have helped keep areas where hundreds of thousands of people go looking far better than they would otherwise.
And some of the gear that has been developed and marketed to them is pretty cool.

Who wouldn't want a super-compact sleeping bag that's warmer than one far heavier?
I'd like one...except that I know I'll spend that money on a knife instead. :D
 
How many knives can you carry before you are disqualified from the title of minimalist?

I would say anything over five is getting suspicious.
 
In the UK we have the North and South Downs. They are chalk grassland downs and protected with mainly sheep grazing where farming is permitted. There are plenty of hearty walks for people to enjoy criss crossing the whole place.
What I find very funny is that these downs are man made. The trees were removed only about 900 years ago to make ships.

I see altered wilderness everywhere I've been around the world. Where ever man has been he has given it a go. If uneconomical has moved on but the damage has been already done. The eco system will never be the same again. Just the removal and change of water courses and extraction can have a marked effect vast distances from the actual activity. Its everywhere, even the most remote places show human influence. Not many places humans haven't passed through if not stopped for a while.

So the best we can find is something wild enough.

The old forester, who taught me much, had a full set of Victorian tools in his shed. There wasn't much he couldn't make from the resources of the forest. However, in his pocket was a clasp knife.
In reality the vast majority of people, who have a high standard of living, visiting the outdoors and do a bit of camping will get away with maybe a penknife, folder, or even something from the kitchen drawer. Sports trekking over well sign posted trails, that hundreds of people enjoy ever year, really don't need much knife.
Those who choose to be a bit more adventurous, try different approaches, and end up much further than the beaten path, would do well to pack accordingly. A substantial blade, even specialised, may well be prudent to having a safe and enjoyable time.

I'm a bit of a tourist on this forum, I've already been told off, and I live in the UK. What I don't get is the intolerance of other peoples take on answering a thread. Sure we all have our own ideas. Strong views on what we feel works from our experience. But surely there is room for wider views without arguing ever little point of reference. I'm no English author so I don't always get my point over well. Certainly my jokes are poor.
I think Pinnah's input informative and see this approach to backpacking becoming more and more what more people expect. Because that is how a lot of people are doing it in their limited free time.
Now I also mix with die hard Bushcrafters who pooh hoo modern camping sports as a nasty plastic modern thing, and the true way is far closer to nature. They too have their point and I'm delighted that some people are keeping some of the old ways going.
All credit too to the historic re enactors trying to work out how it used to be done. There are some great work being done that questions some of the modern established held views that have been found to be way off the mark.

We are all here because we like blades. If you take fresh bacon and eggs on your camping trip occasionally then what blade is about as inportant if your eggs are free range or not or bacon smoked or not. Minimalist camping without a fixed blade basically comes down to how many rashes and how many eggs.
So Stabman you are correct; some rashes and some eggs. Sunny side up.
 
Danke42 said:
How many knives can you carry before you are disqualified from the title of minimalist?

I would say anything over five is getting suspicious.
Click to expand...

Had me in stitches.
Guilty as charged, though after some torment usually get down to two...or three.
 
Everybody can take the tools they plan on using. If all goes to plan, nobody suffers. It is when plans are forced to change that we find ourselves short, & that will be different every time. If you are forced to swim half a mile, I can see leaving a FB behind, unless it is a floating fishing knife. But if you are forced to camp an extra 5-7 days while flooding subsides, a solid FB would likely be more use than a light folder.

For me, it is not which knife, but how many. I take a folder & a FB every time.
 
Do NLT campers bag up their poop and bring it back for disposal, as with dogs at city parks? :confused:
 
GREENJACKET said:
What I don't get is the intolerance of other peoples take on answering a thread. Sure we all have our own ideas. Strong views on what we feel works from our experience. But surely there is room for wider views without arguing ever little point of reference.
Click to expand...
.... possibly the best post on this entire thread thus far....with the exception of the one's that may mention BACON. Every single person who has set foot in the outdoors is 100% entitled to their opinion about what works equipment wise. But it just remains that, their opinion not fact not law. It is when we cross into the realm of "I just know better than you so you have to see it MY way" that we strike trouble. I am not much of a minimalist camper as the camping will always be closly linked to either fishing or hunting so I have a a bit more gear that is required. For the record, I will not be caught dead in the bush without a fixed blade knife (just the size that varies) and generally a small folder. My best mate, two folders and a shrug. We have never argued the merits of either but just last week out under the tarp he mentioned that if things went crappy he would want one of his fixed blades. I responded with a resounding "well duh" but that was the entire span of the argument.

It is fine to have an opinion on something folks, lets just not preach it at each other as being gospel !

Andy

Edited to add....here is the tarp under which said conversation occurred
West%20Oct%2016%2020_zpsihaddagz.jpg
.... ;) ;)
 
mtangent said:
Everybody can take the tools they plan on using. If all goes to plan, nobody suffers. It is when plans are forced to change that we find ourselves short, & that will be different every time. If you are forced to swim half a mile, I can see leaving a FB behind, unless it is a floating fishing knife. But if you are forced to camp an extra 5-7 days while flooding subsides, a solid FB would likely be more use than a light folder.

For me, it is not which knife, but how many. I take a folder & a FB every time.
Click to expand...

Exactly this.

A fixed blade may not be necessary as long as everything goes according to plan, however poo can go sideways in ways you would never have believed were possible if you hadn't just seen it happen. I think the seatbelt analogy someone used earlier in the thread is a good one. Just because you don't plan to get in a wreck (and who does?) doesn't mean it can't happen.

Honestly, looking at Pinnah's gear, I'd be pretty comfortable going out with that equipment... except the lack of a sturdy fixed blade. I just don't believe that leaving home what is probably the most versatile piece of emergency survival gear to save a couple of ounces is particularly well advised.
 
Quiet said:
I was on a trail out on one of the large tracts of wooded land my family owns up in TN and I'm standing at the edge of a large oval shaped clearing I'd just found, and a large cougar casually saunters into the open at the other end. I stood still, Rodent 9 in hand, and we made eye contact. Scared the absolute daylights out of me. Then the moment passed, and that big cat casually just walked across and into the woods. He couldn't have been more than 20 yards away. A cougar would have covered that in an instant if he'd been so inclined, and been all over me like a fat kid on cake. I did not camp there that night, needless to say.
Click to expand...

Where precisely was this? Did anyone take a picture of the cat? Locals say they see cougars/mountain lions in the Blue Ridge area, but nothing has ever been confirmed.
 
22-rimfire said:
Where precisely was this? Did anyone take a picture of the cat? Locals say they see cougars/mountain lions in the Blue Ridge area, but nothing has ever been confirmed.
Click to expand...

Our property is not far from Adamsville. I can tell you that our spread has multiple other large pieces of wooded acreage on all sides of ours. It's a lot of area, all fields, woods, streams, hills. As for the cougar, I don't have any pictures other than the images burned into my memory from that day. The whole encounter couldn't have taken more than twenty seconds, but it felt like an eternity. That thing looked at me, and basically said "I run this joint" then walked off. I stayed still until it had gone, then turned around and went back the way I had come.
 
mewolf1 said:
Some carry, some smear.http://14ers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=36559
Click to expand...

Wow, good lord, I am a leave-a-trace camper for sure. :eek: Hell, I thought ultralight type campers were all about healthy granola bars and organic power foods! Pooping in a hole in the woods can't be that bad for the environment. It's not like we're talking about spreading cholera in the town well, you know.

You LNT'ers can keep your poop tubes - I'll be off the beaten path making sure the Cleveland Steam Train arrives on schedule to the cat hole I dug with my fixed blade. Guaranteed nobody will even know it ever happened.



Andy the Aussie said:
.... snip....

Edited to add....here is the tarp under which said conversation occurred
West%20Oct%2016%2020_zpsihaddagz.jpg
.... ;) ;)
Click to expand...

Is that in Australia? I've been lead to believe that camping in Australia means certain and painful death from poisonous bug bites.
 
Quiet said:
I've seen multiple minimalists with fixed blades. Moras are great, wouldn't you agree? :)
Click to expand...
Yes, Moras are great, but I've still yet to see a minimalist ( or even a UL hiker) in the backcountry with a fixed blade. There are reasons behind the label minimalist. It actually has meaning. The OP asked about minimalist camping.
 
leghog said:
Yes, Moras are great, but I've still yet to see a minimalist ( or even a UL hiker) in the backcountry with a fixed blade. There are reasons behind the label minimalist. It actually has meaning. The OP asked about minimalist camping.
Click to expand...

I've decided that my label is what I'm going by, and my version of minimalist hiking/camping entails the use of a fixed blade, just as I've seen others do. Do you care to argue semantics further? Excellent, I'm glad that's decided. :)
 
Quiet said:
I get the idea that I have offended you in some way in my posts in this thread. The fact is there are PLENTY of places which are wild, unspoiled places left here in the Southeast, and elsewhere. If you don't personally know where they are, and haven't seen them, that's one thing. But to claim that there is "very little such space left" is...well, politely, it's uninformed.

Also, let's cease with the insinuations that it's only the minimalist ultra-light people who camp and leave no trace, ok? That is fallacious, and incorrect. If that's not what you're attempting to say, then I take that back. If you are of that viewpoint, then I don't know what to tell you.

If you have hiked somewhere, whether you had one pound or a hundred on your back, your footprints are on that ground. You've very much left a trace.
Click to expand...
I'm well travelled in the South. Grew up in the Tennessee and lived throughout the southeast at least half my adult life, and I'm now closer to 60 than 50. It is quite apparent your definition of "untouched" and "leave no trace" and mine are vastly different.

If you're chopping up trees, even deadfall, or building shelters, or making fire rings, etc, you are having a much larger impact than you apparently think you are. Let's at least be honest about that.
 
Last edited:
leghog said:
I'm well travelled in the South. Grew up in the Tennessee and lived throughout the southeast at least half my adult life, and I'm now closer to 60 than 50. It is quite apparent your definition of "untouched" and "leave no trace" and mine are vastly different.
Click to expand...

And that's fine, because whatever your definitions are, they work for you. Mine work for me, and if you don't like that, well, quite frankly, I couldn't care less. Your disapproval doesn't mean anything, sorry not sorry, man.

Having given your age though, I'd say that some of your posts towards me are making a lot more sense all of a sudden.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top