Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Tree Damage

Expand Messages
  • Dave Womble
    I understand where Doug is coming from but don t know that we have a solution that is actually workable at this time for high use camping areas. For example,
    Message 1 of 61 , Oct 5, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I understand where Doug is coming from but don't know that we have a
      solution that is actually workable at this time for high use camping

      For example, the HHs are probably the most used backpacking hammocks
      and most of their models (maybe all?) use small diameter rope with
      tree hugger straps. I used one myself for about a year and am familar
      with what the tree hugger straps will do... and what they won't do.
      What they won't do is assure that anyone using a HH won't damage a
      tree. First I have seen where folks didn't bother using the tree
      hugger straps because they didn't think they needed them (and you have
      to admit they add a degree of difficulty in hanging the hammock).
      Well, they did need them and they where very caring folks, just first
      time hammockers that didn't understand the problem. Second the length
      of the tree huggers is fixed and doesn't always work out to be the
      length you need and this can easily leave part of the tree subject to
      the small diameter rope... I marked tree(s) myself because of that
      until someone told me their techniques to overcome this design oversight.

      My point is that just saying "use webbing" isn't a solution at this
      point unless you want to ban any hammock that uses any rope on the
      support straps... and I'm not sure that would really solve all the
      problems of hanging hammocks to trees. We also haven't addressed the
      tarp issue! We hang those to trees also and often use thin cord that
      can mark trees as well... and I do realize that Ed uses a four wrap
      knot that helps with this, but not every tree is small enough in
      diameter to accomodate four wraps of the cord lengths that we
      typically use for tarps. What we need is a well thought out plan that
      addresses the problems in a way that hammock campers using a wide
      array of different hammocks can live with and the folks in charge of
      protecting and preserving campsites feel okay with. At this point in
      time, I don't know what that is. I also don't know the process that
      will yield this result unless it is to use hammock stands, one the
      user brings or ones the campsite provides. Maybe we should open this
      up to discussion and suggestions as it sounds like an excellent topic
      for this forum? If we do discuss it I think the first discussion
      should be whether more stringent requirements should be placed on high
      use campsites, ie campgrounds, than on backpacking in forest areas
      where you don't have concentrated use.

      Dave Womble
      aka Youngblood

      --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "dlfrost_1" <dlfrost@a...> wrote:
      > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Bill in Houston"
      > <zippydooda@y...> wrote:
      > > Because once you quit basing decisions on reality, it makes it even
      > > easier to ban something. If you accept the spurious proposition
      > that
      > > all hammock ropes are harmful to all trees, then you are just that
      > much
      > > closer to accepting that all hammocks with straps are harmful to
      > all
      > > trees. It's best to keep a grasp on reality and logic for as long
      > as
      > > possible.
      > Point taken, but let's all remember that decisions about government
      > policy are not inherently based on reality and logic, but are instead
      > political at least to some degree.
      > If problems with careless hammockers becomes too severe for land
      > managers to ignore it won't be talked about as "those few individuals
      > who use small, hard ropes." It will be referred to as "the hammock
      > problem" and will very likely be dealt with on that basis. My
      > suggestion that webbing only be allowed is an attempt to short-
      > circuit the problem at its root. I'll leave it to you to decide the
      > suggestion's worth.
      > Doug Frost
    • dlfrost_1
      ... Or just flat-out tell baldface lies. Yep. It s happened lots of times before. And you, Bill, Rick and the rest are right there s not enough scientific
      Message 61 of 61 , Oct 13, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, Dylan Anderson <hum469@y...>
        > My point
        > though was that the minorities (absinthe, hammocks,
        > off roaders) are always the first one banned when the
        > would-be prohibitors are aware of their presence, and
        > it is only a matter of time with the rate of growth of
        > hammock camping before the camping prohibitionists
        > start talking about how damaging we all are. And when
        > they attack something, junk science is always used.

        Or just flat-out tell baldface lies. Yep. It's happened lots of
        times before. And you, Bill, Rick and the rest are right there's not
        enough scientific data and we need studies. So they'll want to study
        it. I'm guessing they'll ban hammocks while they do that.
        Prohibition is the default option in government decisionmaking, after
        all. And government studies (likes the ones done for the Park
        Service) can take years.

        I'm hoping that if we approach these people with something workable
        we can avoid the prohibition part in the interim.

        Doug Frost
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.