[pct-l] a letter to C. Thorpe

[charliethorpe@att.net (Charlie Thorpe)]

Hello CMountainDave -

You said:

> Charlie - I think the thing about your posts is that they come across as if
> we experienced backpackers don't know from s--- and therefore we must be
> educated by you. In the obsessive world, there is always the need for
> improvement. Therefore no matter what I come up with as a way to do whatever,
> the obsessive person will ALWAYS feel compelled to point out its flaws and a
> better way to do whatever. Some people are obsessive and some are not and you
> strike me as being obsessive. So just chalk it up to "You can lead a horse to
> water but you can't make him drink." I'm going to continue to burn my T. P.
> when conditions warrant. Sorry, but your posts have only served to harden my
> position especially being the situationalist that I am. Perhaps you should
> opt for the Seinfeld one-liners and web site references instead of long
> "educational" posts that come across as condescending and patronizing. IMHO

My postings are never written to come across as condescending and
patronizing.  I am sorry that you read them that way..."condescending and
patronizing" really (really, Really, REALLY!) gets in the way of a good
discussion.

Unless I state otherwise, the practical examples that I use are just "best
case" scenarios intended to show the current thinking on the kinds of
practices that tend to have as little long-term impact as possible.  These
practices are constantly being debated and the recommendations are always
changing as the recreation ecologists and other scientists come up with new
approaches.  

The conceptual ideas that lead to the studies that lead to the new
recommended approaches come from folks like us here on PCT-L.  People that
care share ideas and tips about how to minimize their impacts.  Those ideas
that seem to work for different people in differing ecosystems find their
way into the constantly ongoing studies.  If a study or two or three backs
the concept up, it gets included in the recommended LNT practices.  Who
knows, one of our ideas might make the LNT big time someday!

Take a look at the other messages in the LNT series that has previously been
posted on PCT-L.  "LNT 9 - Shinola" and "LNT 10 - Poop Soup" are the only
messages that have been posted lately - the rest are in the archives.  The
first messages in the series give some of the background info and the
remaining messages discuss other recommended "best case" practices.

It has been interesting that toothpaste glop has gotten as much airplay as
it has.  This particular "problem" is so far down on the "major concern"
scale that it is commonly used as a joking way ("minty poots") to help point
out that even the most innocuous little minor damage can become a pretty
good-sized mess if done over and over and over long enough in the same
place.

Human waste and campfire practices usually catch the most flack.  Some folks
(collectors, particularly) get a slow burn over "leave what you find".  Even
had a big list-debate once over which side of the trail we backpackers
should stand on when the hosses go by.

All in all, the discussion is never meant to be exclusive.  Experts and
novices alike need to chime in with both questions and solutions.  LNT needs
to represent everybody's thinking...it's going to take all of us working
together to make enough of a difference so that there will be a beautiful
experience left when my granddaughter (and yours) hikes her hike!

Trace No Leaves,

- Charlie