Just an idea for a cloth patch I have just knocked up in literally 5 minutes - could get some made if any interest?

NO_TRACE by Norway Calling, on Flickr

NorwayCalling wrote:Just an idea for a cloth patch I have just knocked up in literally 5 minutes - could get some made if any interest?

NO_TRACE by Norway Calling, on Flickr

Changing the central illustration from 'mountains & river' to 'camp fire with a big X through it' may be even more effective?

That was a quick delete.

boxelder wrote: What in the photograph shows irresponsible use of a fire?

Perhaps it promotes irresponsible use of a fire?

Yes, I did delete quickly, but after a fair bit of consideration. I'll repost:

I lit that fire. We collected up driftwood and rubbish from the beach and burned it below the tide line, removing any 'rubbish residue' to bin and scattering the smoky rocks, knowing that the next tide would remove the traces. I quite often do the same in that area. The hipster only had one beer (locally sourced) and didn't drive.
The event it promoted is careful to use local businesses, liaise with locals and landowners to avoid conflict. We start and finish wherever possible near public transport and encourage lift sharing.

I deleted because I didn't want to get into a discussion about 'my' fire encouraging others to do the same less responsibly - a good valid point. Does a picture of someone riding through remote, potentially fragile environments (however responsibly) not risk encouraging others to do so less responsibly? No pics of bothies then, or tarps strung in trees? Wading gravel bed rivers should be avoided, and fragile bog/wetland habitats?

If we want equipment/gear at a reasonable price for our 'selfish pursuit' brands need to promote and sell their goods.

In hindsight the "No camp......" quote was perhaps ill advised - the fact that the camping on the event is at a proper campsite with fires permitted etc is far from clear in the photo, so we'll do be more careful in future.

The 'leave no trace' thing is a can of worms though and what it really means is 'Leave no visible trace.

I hope we all pay as much attention to the invisible impacts of what we do.

I don't believe we can leave "no" trace, i.e. it's not a phrase to be taken literally but an aspiration.

If I walk across a grass meadow then I'll leave a trace but it's temporary and in a few days the grass will have recovered from being stood on and apart from perhaps a residual scent that may be picked up by a bloodhound you wouldn't know I'd been there.

If I walked across that meadow once a day following the same route then in a short period the grass along that line would be come stunted partly due to being trodden on and partly due to the soil being compacted and there'd be an obvious path. I've only left "footprints" but the effect is longer lasting and it could take several years for the "path" to disappear.

As far as fires go, if you are in a suitable area then something like a portable fire pit lets you have your "traditional campfire" experience without leaving scars. I don't think I'll be packing one for any bikepacking trip though

portable fire pit

Which is exactly what we do at the overnight - steel firebowls are what riders see and sit around.

If one is reckless on a bike then there will be a bit of erosion, a skid mark, some local damage.

If one is reckless with a fire the entire wood can burn down. Okay, maybe a tad extreme, but still a valid point.

whitestone wrote:I don't believe we can leave "no" trace, i.e. it's not a phrase to be taken literally but an aspiration.

If I walk across a grass meadow then I'll leave a trace but it's temporary and in a few days the grass will have recovered from being stood on and apart from perhaps a residual scent that may be picked up by a bloodhound you wouldn't know I'd been there.

If I walked across that meadow once a day following the same route then in a short period the grass along that line would be come stunted partly due to being trodden on and partly due to the soil being compacted and there'd be an obvious path. I've only left "footprints" but the effect is longer lasting and it could take several years for the "path" to disappear.

As far as fires go, if you are in a suitable area then something like a portable fire pit lets you have your "traditional campfire" experience without leaving scars. I don't think I'll be packing one for any bikepacking trip though

I had this argument with a walker once (with me pushing my bike). She went up everyday, wind rain or shine but couldn’t see that she was part of the problem of creating multiple paths on the hill. She thought that I caused more erosion by pushing my bike along the path once every blue moon! Gave up trying to reason with her

whitestone wrote:I don't believe we can leave "no" trace, i.e. it's not a phrase to be taken literally but an aspiration.

If I walk across a grass meadow then I'll leave a trace but it's temporary and in a few days the grass will have recovered from being stood on and apart from perhaps a residual scent that may be picked up by a bloodhound you wouldn't know I'd been there.

If I walked across that meadow once a day following the same route then in a short period the grass along that line would be come stunted partly due to being trodden on and partly due to the soil being compacted and there'd be an obvious path. I've only left "footprints" but the effect is longer lasting and it could take several years for the "path" to disappear.

I think one of the issues being discussed is the portraying of something via media/social media to inspire others. In your example, if you were to make and post a video (for example) of you walking across the meadow in glorious sunshine, with bunnies cavorting and lambs gambolling in the background, thousands (OK, maybe an exaggeration) may be inspired to also walk across the meadow too, taking a lot less care either through ignorance or attitude.

If something is 'put out there' in a fashion that makes it attractive or inspirational to others then without education or the right attitude that something will cause issues.

No answers here, sorry. We all live by double standards to a lesser or greater extent. I'm a hypocritical mass of them but at least I try to fess up . Some days my hypocriticalities will be completely inverted from the previous day making things even more confusing. One LNT/TLS elephant-in-the-room for me is that we often travel huge mileages to get somewhere where we can "get away from it all". Shame about all the dual-carriageways ploughed through the previously pristine and unspoiled countryside on the way to allow us to do the 'getting away'. Some people near me are campaigning against one wind turbine because "it spoils their view of the landscape". These same people are oblivious to the fact their "landscape" is basically a load of sterile fields existing solely as an agricultural factory floor. They are also the same people who lobbied for a noisy unsightly dual-carriageway bypass to their village. Another one is buying all your provisions at your "local" mega-Tesco on the retail park before you leave home and buy nothing when you're away. I guess we can only do the best we can within some sort of personal moral framework (sorry BrownDog, moral compass activated on this thread instead!). Nobody's framework will be the same though. Some have no framework at all. Society's moral compass swings as wildly as personal ones. In the 60s we loved plastic, now we want to ban it. In the 1970s we loved Angel Delight, now we want to... ermm.. ok we still love Angel Delight especially the butterscotch one. In the 60s/70s/80s the "scars" of mining were eradicated from mid-Wales to "improve the environment", now we're desperately trying to conserve what's left. Blimey, this is all a bit deep for a Saturday afternoon.

Still, Stu's right. We stop doing things, break habits, because we're clever enough to realise they're not doing us, or something else, any good. Slavery, asbestos, those blue M&Ms or whatever they were.

'Reg'

I disagree Reg, the blue ones where nice! and Butter scotch was the worst flavour EVER has to be choc or strawberry for sure

"Does portraying said pyromaniacal bitumen eschewing velocipedist to be quaffing spirituous libation incite intoxication" said Mr Troll.

The wind turbines issue does amuse me.
People want electricity yet don’t seem to want many of the means for generation.

When I was riding Le Jog there were many wind turbines on the north coast and some locals were complaining “no more”; seemed a bit odd as they have lots of wind, little to block said wind, and the wiring infrastructure (national grid going to dounreay nuclear power station)

As for buying in a local shop.

Again on le jog, if buying in a local shop (certainly in highlands of Scotland) said shop was usually quite willing to fill water bottles.
Did this trick a couple of times. Usually enough buying a pint or milk and some cakes of some variety.

Don't really want to get involved in a turbine debate but if people knew the full story, I'm sure they'd likely be far less keen.

Also, if we perhaps focused a little on simple energy conservation through education, then we wouldn't need them all.

Bearbonesnorm wrote:Don't really want to get involved in a turbine debate but if people knew the full story, I'm sure they'd likely be far less keen.

Also, if we perhaps focused a little on simple energy conservation through education, then we wouldn't need them all.

PM me the full story; would be interested to read what isn’t openly said

Including path erosion in this discussion does open a can of worms. Torridon is a good example - loads of people are riding the trails as they are so accessible but they were originally created as informal stalking tracks then a lot of work was done on them in the late '90's to address erosion caused by all the hoards of walkers using them. The techniques used are fairly light touch and won't stand much in the way of heavy use so are suffering pretty badly. The bike riders are spending plenty in the local economy but none of is making its way into some purse to fix the trails....

Back to fires, I re-read Ray Mears' treatise on the subject. He is all for them and describes how to make fire and leave no trace. Its quite complicated though (no rocks, dig out turves, scatter ashes and coals widely) plus if a lot of people do this in a small area, it doesn't work.

Regarding wind turbines - the problem is they don't really generate electricity. At least not very much compared to the cost of installation and maintenance. They generate taxes, revenue for the companies and a massive amount of dosh for the landowners, for zero input and minimal loss of land values, especially in Caithness.

"turbine debate" - agreed. It was just an example of people's double-standards and blind spots with regard to what is or isn't unsightly. Let's not start on the separate issue of the economics of power generation. There are some pretty mad renewables subsidies but so there are for other types - eg even the supporters of Hinkley C nuclear station agree the price/unit of its electricity will be at least 50% higher than 2025's expected wider wholesale price. Nothing is what it seems. Oh, I have started. Sorry .

"simple energy conservation" - absolutely. Huge waste of power going on all the time.

Asposium wrote:The wind turbines issue does amuse me.
People want electricity yet don’t seem to want many of the means for generation.

When I was riding Le Jog there were many wind turbines on the north coast and some locals were complaining “no more”; seemed a bit odd as they have lots of wind, little to block said wind, and the wiring infrastructure (national grid going to dounreay nuclear power station)

I think the Caithness locals have a legitimate grievance in not wanting to host the turbines for folk living far away. If every area/region/county had to host it's own power generation we'd have different answers, including less usage overall.

FWIW on my regular touring trips, whether two or four wheels, I always prefer to spend money in the area I'm travelling through. Bikepacking can be different though as opportunities are often fewer.

If every area/region/county had to host it's own power generation we'd have different answers, including less usage overall.

Without doubt.

Bearbonesnorm wrote:

If every area/region/county had to host it's own power generation we'd have different answers, including less usage overall.

Without doubt.

Yes! I live in Ellesmere Port, so I’ll be sorted for nuclear power and oil, can even buy a locally made car too

Having been surrounded by collieries for most of my life, I have no problem being surrounded by turbines now they've gone.
It seemed to be that people used to accept that methods of power generation were a necessity and put up with them being in their locale. It now seems that no one wants anything anywhere near them.
Thankfully, the leave no trace ethos has been ignored around here and I have plenty of lanscaped pit tips to huff and puff up in pale imitation of hills further afield.

Meant to mention:

I was watching the fellow following the Wye from its source to the Severn on iPlayer. Cue the gratuitous firelight scene - clearly he isn't camping but a camp fire for the atmosphere couldn't be resisted. It also looked like they made two different fires to film it as in one scene it looked like logs burning and in the next just tindersticks.
Ah well, when you are out in the wilds (or in this case, on some massive estate along side the river.)

Was just reading up on fires currently burning in New Mexico that may affect TD riders and saw this

http://www.krqe.com/news/wildfires/huma ... 1211919201

There's a bit of a discussion going on over on stw about throwing BBQ coals on the floor and lighting up to use as a cooker ,think Mr Whitestone is trying to educate the fella but to no avail from the bits I read