Re[2]: [at-l] another stove question

[spiriteagle99@xxxxxxxxxxx (Jim and/or Ginny Owen)]

Shane wrote:
>Well, being as I don't carry a radio, a television set, or get newspapers
>delivered while on the trail, I probably won't find out about the ban until
>I hit a town.  At which point, I'll just mail it forward.

Hmmm - That may be true where you hike - but on the AT  and very often on
the other long trails, the grapevine is far more efficient than you imagine.
  You'd know within a day - if not within hours.  On the AT you're nearly
always within a day or so of a town, so mailing a stove isn't a big deal.
The problem with that is that if you're carrying a stove, you're also
carrying food that needs to be cooked.  Especially if you're carrying the
type of food that Weary advocates.  You might want to also mail that food
ahead.  But then - what do you replace it with?  That CAN be a problem
unless you're really into junk food <VBG>

Seems to me I remember one little store that carried cigarettes, beer, a few
cokes, ice cream bars and a couple cans of Spam.

Incidentally - there's nothing wrong with Weary's way of cooking/eating for
those who are willing to do it.  But a LOT of people who thought it was a
good idea before starting their hike have discovered that it's not what they
want to be doing once they get out there.

>>But even that's not always possible - ask the people
>>who've had their Zips (and other stoves) confiscated in
>>New Mexico and California.
>
>I've never had that experience, and I don't know anybody who has.

I know several people who DID have it happen - in the Shenandoah, in the
Sierras and in New Mexico.  Not to say that any particular individual would
encounter the situation - but it's NOT just a bad pipedream.


>If
>someone tried to confiscate my stove, I wouldn't let it go unless someone
>quoted me chapter and verse of the law.  The days of police confiscation of
>personal property is gone - if they're going to confiscate contraband, they
>have to arrest you to do so.

That's a nice theory - and may well be the law.  But that's not reality when
you're in the Carson NF and the Rangers give you the choice of giving up
your stove, leaving the trail or being arrested.  Pokey time plays hell with
a thruhike. I've had to consider that choice several times.  <VBG>

>If it became a real hassle, then I suppose I'd have to give it up and order
>a new one from ZIP...

Yup.

Incidentally, watch out for airlines - some of them also confiscate stoves.
Until this last summer I hadn't carried a stove on an airline for years.
This last summer, I carried not one, but two alcohol stoves.  One of the
advantages of alcohol stoves - as long as you don't carry the fuel, too.
Don't have a clue what they'd do with a Zip.  Anyone know?

>>Basically, I'm not big on Zips for a couple reasons - one
>>is that thruhikers generally aren't interested in long-
>>cooking meals.  So trying to sell the stove to thruhikers
>>on that basis is self-defeating.
>
>I'm not trying to sell anything.  I'm trying to show a 'better' way.

Sure you are.  "Showing a better way" is always a sales job.  <VBG>
Fact is - it might be better - for some people.  But not for everyone.

We went through this a couple years ago with respect to water filters -
there's a contingent that doesn't believe in them.  Which is fine - except
when they get militant that everyone else should follow their example.  The
main rationale for that is they've never gotten sick.  What they overlook is
that others "have" gotten sick - sometimes from the same water sources.  I
got an email sometime back from a friend who had finished the CDT. He
detailed the illnesses that he'd picked up along the way and what it cost
him to "get better".  And he specifically assigned the cause to his lack of
a water filter.  When that information was presented here, it was dismissed
as being irrelevant.  And yet every reason that was given for the "real
cause" of his problems was invalid.  They were all based on AT experiences -
like the sharing of Gorp.  That doesn't happen when you're hiking alone -
and he did.  What I'm saying is that what works for you may or may not work
for others - but claiming it to be the "ultimate" method doesn't cut it with
me cause I've seen too many "other" ways that worked equally well for those
who were using them.  What sometimes bugs me a little is when people tell
about "their way" to do something (like stoves - or water filters),
emphasizing the superlatives - and totally ignoring - or sometimes even
vehemently denying the negatives.  Kinda like a used car salesman.  <g>


>  ;)  I wonder how many of those thru-hiker drop outs would have stayed the
>course if they'd have had real food in them...

Undoubtedly more than one. One of the "facts" of the Trail is that there are
people who drop out in Gorham - or even Monson.  Some for lack of funds,
some for lack of energy, some for lack of will and/or patience.  Some of
them just need a couple days to rest and feed up and they'd be ready to go
again.  For some of them, that probably wouldn't make a difference - but I
suspect they're a very small minority.

Fact is that on the AT there are so many possible town stops that getting
"real food" is simply not a problem. The real problem is usually that when
the boys and gals hit town some of them spend their  money on pizza, beer
and cigarettes and fail to hit the salad bar.  Vitamin deficiencies are
historically endemic on the Trail.  And that kind of deficiancy will get ya.


>In similar conditions, I have never failed to find enough dry fuel to fire
>my stove.  If you do, you aren't looking hard enough, or in the right
>places.  You don't need enough for a real fire, just a couple of handfuls
>of short twigs.

Let's see - I said 19 out of 23 days were wet for me.  Have you tried that
in the southern Appalachians?  Yeah - I know how to find dry stuff to burn,
too - even under those conditions.  But the average thruhiker doesn't have a
clue about that.  Very few of them have had any survival training and a lot
of them have little to no backpacking experience.  That could be a real
miserable experience for someone just starting the Trail.  A lot of people
quit the Trail for a lot less reason.


>>But then there's the smell.  I can't stand to wear clothes
>>that are washed in many (most) detergents.  I can't stand
>>to be around people who use heavy perfumes (or cologne).
>>And I no longer tolerate campfires all that well -
>>I've started "maybe" 5 campfires in the last 12 years. So
>>I'm not likely to tolerate the smell of a Zip for very
>>long.  Probably not any longer than the next town stop
>>where I can get rid of it.  But that's personal preference
>>- mine.
>
>I can't argue with that in any way.  Personally, I love to take a smoke
>bath.  I tend to smell like smoke, and even after a hike that smell doesn't
>come off of me for a few days.  That's from a real campfire, though.  Very
>little smoke escapes the zip stove, and really only when getting it started
>- if you do it right.

I find that having myself, my gear or my clothes constantly smelling of wood
smoke dulls my sense of smell.  And smelling the bear - or the elk - or even
the dead mountain goat - is part of the experience for me.  I'd suspect that
my sense of smell is considerably better than the average.  I prefer to keep
it that way.


>>One other point that someone mentioned back there - the
>>particles in wood smoke are NOT so heavy that they drop to
>>the ground.  In fact, they're fine enough that they become
>>part of the atmospheric circulation. Where do you think
>>the Brown Cloud over Southeast Asia originates?
>
>Not from ZIP stoves, I'm sure.  That's kind of like saying that my urine is
>helping to turn the world's oceans acidic, so I should stop peeing...


LOL!!!

Yeah - that's what they all say. That's what every one of those millions of
people in Southeast Asia says, too. That's what the people in the Owens
Valley in CA said, too.   And that's what all those terrible SUV drivers
say.  <VBG>

No individual contributes "that much" - but the aggregate?  That's a
different story. Hey - I'm not gettin' on you about "your" Zip - it's just
that, in general, there seems to be little realization that "your" (or "my")
"little bit" is just as much a part of the problem as the other guys.

Along this line of thought - to answer Weary's contention - if you do some
real research (or just talk to a good physical chemist) I think you'll find
that the products of combustion differ in some important ways from the
products of decomposition.  Think "acid rain" for one thing.  To my
knowledge, no one's blamed acid rain on decomposition products - only on
combustion products.  Nor does decomposition release carbon particles into
the atmosphere - combustion does.  In fact, I wonder how much CO2 is
actually released during decomposition?  Not as much as during combustion
(for the same mass), I think.

And then there's the time factor --- sudden release vs multiple years.
Something to think about.

Walk softly,
Jim


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail