Timeline for How to deal with unethical campers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2017 at 22:50 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @tsturzl Yes, of course, and I agree with that too. I don't think it's terrible to cut down trees, but I rarely ever do so since it's not necessary; you can go a long way using fallen wood, and still longer breaking dead branches off of trees. I just meant that, if you do cut down a tree, one tree goes a long way if used properly. One small tree should be good for multiple fires, and one large tree should be sufficient for a great many fires. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 22:41 | comment | added | tsturzl | @Aaron There's plenty of dead wood in places where there are trees, I don't understand the need to cut one down in most environments. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | Loduwijk | @tsturzl That is understandable. Please note that I did specify "could not handle the resource use" as an exception. If the area you speak of truly is such an area, then it qualifies for that exception to my view. Also (and this is not a disagreement with you), I would doubt that 20% of people would remove a tree even if it were within the rules - 20% of groups maybe. I agree that taking multiple trees for a huge fire and seating is negligent; *one* tree should be able to last for *many* fires, possibly enough for everyone in the area for their entire trip if used efficiently. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:46 | comment | added | tsturzl | In 2016 438 pounds of trash were hauled out of a wilderness area near me, 273 incidents of unburied human waste, and 323 illegal campfires and well as signs of numerous violations of dispersed camping rules. It's absolutely disgusting. This is why I say if you don't practice LNT as specified directly by the ranges is the rules of the wilderness, then DO NOT go into those areas, stay at home. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:44 | comment | added | tsturzl | Just the sheer number of visitors alone has environmental impacts, especially in the area which I watch this happen. There were probably at least 10 others camping around here. Some of them were having small fires away from trees with dead fallen wood, even though you aren't supposed to, that's not something that really concerns me. I'm not a stickler for the rules by any means, but there are some things so blatantly harmful and negligent that they are destroying the natural areas in the state that I live. | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 16:40 | comment | added | tsturzl | @Aaron You assume that it isn't. I think you're also assuming that protected areas aren't protected for a reason. If everyone who came there fell a tree it would be barren in a year. To fall a tree to have a massive fire in an area prone to wildfires seems anything but respectful, and build camp furniture out of which you'll just leave there. I'm sorry, but I don't think you should ever fall a tree in a wilderness. Maybe where you are those areas don't get many visitors. Where I am if 20% of the people visiting an area fell one single tree, it would absolutely devastate the environment. | |
| Nov 27, 2017 at 20:44 | comment | added | Loduwijk | While I understand your concern in your last paragraph, it being "detrimental" is really a matter of opinion, one which those people may not have shared. My personal opinion is that "leave no trace" should be applied only to the rare location that truly could not handle even minimal resource use from the amount of people that visit it, which in my opinion is rare. The animals certainly are not practicing leave no trace. I'm more of a "be one with nature, use it but respectfully" mindset. I would probably follow the rules anyway though; the point of your Q is good. Be careful near such people. | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 14:01 | history | edited | WedaPashi♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| May 8, 2017 at 6:43 | comment | added | Langley | Maybe suggest collecting dead wood from the ground? You probably can't talk them out of making a fire but at least cutting a tree if there's plenty of even drier wood lying around. | |
| Sep 6, 2016 at 16:58 | comment | added | bobbym | Let them alone. The forest is a lonely place and the law is far away. | |
| Oct 19, 2015 at 10:53 | history | edited | WedaPashi♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Aug 29, 2015 at 23:22 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackOutdoors/status/637767232852992000 | ||
| Aug 14, 2015 at 20:24 | comment | added | tsturzl | @njzk2 Had certainly crossed my mind. I hadn't approached them for this reason, and the fact that I was outnumbered and alone. | |
| Aug 14, 2015 at 16:33 | comment | added | njzk2 | people who fall down trees have axes. I would not threaten someone that has an axe in their hand. | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 19:18 | vote | accept | tsturzl | ||
| Aug 11, 2015 at 8:28 | answer | added | WedaPashi♦ | timeline score: 15 | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 6:19 | comment | added | tsturzl | There is a sign before you get to the lake specifying no fires, which they clearly had. I feel like if they had broken the rules, they weren't about to abide by them and getting a permit for wood collection. This is in a mountainous area, and I'm fairly certain removing wood is restricted in this area. | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 6:11 | comment | added | Eric | For what it's worth, logging is allowed (with a permit) in many national forests. Usually in a wilderness area there's no logging allowed. You may want to inquire with the rangers to see if it's legal or not. | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 6:05 | history | asked | tsturzl | CC BY-SA 3.0 |