[at-l] LNT is wrong IMHO

[lparker@cacaphony.net (L. Parker)]

Second the motion, and the proof is easy enough to find. Just look at any
large blowdown on the trail and see how long it took for a few hundred
people to create a new "trail" around it. Problem is the new trail is not
necessarily designed to accommodate things like runoff or constant wear from
foot traffic and may itself become a mudhole or blowout.

Lee I Joe

>
> You have to consider the trail its self is all ready a done
> deal. Their
> isn't really much more damage you can do to a well worn dirt
> path. Even if
> the path gets deeper, its better then getting wider or making
> a temp around
> the puddle path. Its also easier to tell people to walk
> through the puddle
> then to have tons of people carefully in their minds walk
> around the puddle.
> You really have to look at 100 or 200 hikers doing the same thing. 200
> people making the puddle a little deeper isn't that bad
> because it the all
> ready well worn trail. But 200 people bushwhacking around the
> puddle will do
> a lot more damage to the veg and surrounding area.
> JTW

>
>
> > I did a little experiment these last two weeks.
> > I created a mudhole to study the dynamics and
> > based on that study, I think the LNT advice to
> > plow thru is wrong if the idea is to minimize
> > damage to the trail bed.
> >
> > First, an established mud hole consists of
> > a layer of muddy water over a layer of soft
> > ground (which I'll call transitional strata) over
> > a layer of undisturbed but saturated ground.
> >
> > When you walk through the puddle, you
> > impact the fragile, saturated. under layer and
> > convert it to transitional layer which has
> > lost the typical soil structure.  This has
> > the effect of deepening the hole or rather
> > deepening the impacted strata/area of the trail bed.
> >
> > Also, when the mudhole is in the "muck"
> > stage, walking through it removes considerable
> > amount of soil as mud clinging to boots which
> > also deepens the hole by removing material.
> > I did a scrape of my boots during one particularly
> > mucky period and I had removed a cup of material
> > per boot.  No wonder they keep getting deeper and deeper.
> >
> > Based on these observations, I don't know why
> > the recommendation is to plow through.
> > Somebody tell me where I'm wrong?
> >
> > Now I'm not recommending "skirting" as a
> > preferred practice.  The areas adjacent to
> > the mud hole are saturated and will also
> > loose their structure under the impact of a
> > boot.  You will jut make the hole wider.
> >
> > AFAIKS, the real LNT way would be to buskwack
> > carefully around the problematic section until
> > stepping stones can be laid or proper drainage installed.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > From the AT-L mailing list         est. 1995
> > Need help?  http://www.at-l.org
> > Archives: http://www.backcountry.net/arch/at/
> > Change your options or unsubscribe:
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> From the AT-L mailing list         est. 1995
> Need help?  http://www.at-l.org
> Archives: http://www.backcountry.net/arch/at/
> Change your options or unsubscribe:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l