Lnt

[Tramper Al]

Maybe, just maybe, the reason we need LNT principles is that there are so many otherwise unprincipled people out there who think they know better, and/or would otherwise rationalize whatever they want to do.

And welcome back.

 

[rondak46]

When your right...

... your right!

 

[sli74]

What am I missing here? Is this in response to something else, Tramper?

sli74

Maybe, just maybe, the reason we need LNT principles is that there are so many otherwise unprincipled people out there who think they know better, and/or would otherwise rationalize whatever they want to do.

And welcome back.

 

[VFTTop'r]

Maybe, just maybe, the reason we need LNT principles...

That all depends on how far one wants to go with LNT. Extremists would want to close everything down. Although who defines extreme? Who defines what are acceptable LNT principles? Remember, EVERY footstep leaves a trace of some sort. Multiply that by tens of thousands of footsteps year after year.

 

[Jasonst]

Maybe, just maybe, the reason we need LNT principles is that there are so many otherwise unprincipled people out there who think they know better, and/or would otherwise rationalize whatever they want to do.

And welcome back.

Huh? So the principled ones are already following the "rules"? What's there to make the unprincipled ones to follow the rules? There seems to be a contradiction in your premise...

 

[Tramper Al]

Is this in response to something else, Tramper?

I am under the impression that one is somewhat less likely to be thought of as 'hijacking' a thread when one starts one's own.

That all depends on how far one wants to go with LNT. Extremists would want to close everything down. Although who defines extreme? Who defines what are acceptable LNT principles? Remember, EVERY footstep leaves a trace of some sort. Multiply that by tens of thousands of footsteps year after year.

Right, those darn 'extremists'. Are you making the argument that because there is disagreement as to where to 'draw the line', that the line does not exist?

Huh? So the principled ones are already following the "rules"? What's to there make the unprincipled ones to follow the rules? There seems to be a contradiction in your premise...

I'm not sure I made any suggestion about enforcing rules. Would not the truely unprincipled be opposed to (and immune from) any rules that did not suit their immediate purpose?

 

[sli74]

I am under the impression that one is somewhat less likely to be thought of as 'hijacking' a thread when one starts one's own.

What thread are you trying NOT to hijack, I have definitely missed something somewhere . . .

sli74

 

[Puck]

What thread are you trying NOT to hijack, I have definitely missed something somewhere . . .

sli74

Seema
I am lost, too. It either a nonsequitor or the sound of one hand claping.

 

[VFTTop'r]

Right, those darn 'extremists'. Are you making the argument that because there is disagreement as to where to 'draw the line', that the line does not exist?

The line does exist or we would not be discussing it, but it's always moving and nobody can get ahold of it long enogh to say "I've got it!" "This is THE standard!"

It seems like everyone does what's right for the moment and what seems right in his/her own eyes. There is no standard.

 

[Tramper Al]

What thread are you trying NOT to hijack, I have definitely missed something somewhere . . .

Weren't there a few posts written at one time or another, about how people should conduct themselves with respect to the woods, mountains, and waters and their natural and cultural history, about whether a higher ethical standard was beneficial to all or whether each individual should just act for his own benefit? Wasn't there some disagreement about what to take and what to leave? I thought I remembered reading something like that once.

 

[Jasonst]

Apparently there IS a line... LNT

 

[Tramper Al]

Apparently there IS a line... LNT

Hey, that's a good link, thanks. Who would have thought there there were well defined principles for preserving natural, cultural and historic integrity in the outdoors. And so simple that we could all follow them.

Now, what if I think I am smarter than the people who wrote these priciples? What if I think I know more, and I'll just take what I want, leave what I want, and generally do what I want? What then?

 

[Rik]

Is there a point to this thread?

 

[Jasonst]

I am having a hard time decoding Tramper Al's sarcasm. A little help?

 

[ripple]

Seems like someone wants to get heated debates going!

 

[maineguy]

That would appear to be the case...

 

[rondak46]

Seema...

... he may be referring to this thread which has changed course

http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?p=69076#post69076

Mike

 

[rondak46]

"Carry in....

.. Carry out" is principled enough for me.

Mike

 

[spencer]

My decoder ring also tells me that since the last line of Tramper's original post is "and Welcome Back" I have to think he was replying to the thread about buzzing planes around summits and welcoming our very own Afka_Bob back from his hiatus.

 

[Tramper Al]

Is there a point to this thread?

Hey, hey, now. Unfair. Everyone knows that is not necessary here.

Seems like someone wants to get heated debates going!

Not in the least, really.

If everyone agrees, then that's fine and good. There should be more mushrooms, airplane parts, antlers, and fossils for all to see and enjoy from here on out.

. . . I have to think he was replying to the thread about buzzing planes around summits and welcoming our very own Afka_Bob back from his hiatus.

Yes, yes, I did notice that the poster formerly banned has returned to us. All good. But what do I know.

Take only pictures - and memories.
Leave only footprints - and deep tracks in the snow.