LNT says stop geotagging

[Hawkwin]

https://www.adventure-journal.com/2018/06/leave-no-trace-says-stop-geotagging-petes-sake/

This story, combined with my recent BALOO/IOLS training got me wondering about what are some of the things BSA still does that we should probably stop doing if we really wanted to comply with LNT principles. I am currently working on my Outdoor Ethics so I am certainly no expert on this stuff (yet) but I've not previously had a strong impression that LNT was a high priority for many scouts or scouters when camping. That isn't to say they were destructive, just no specific awareness or heightened effort to abide by LNT (e.g. "Hey scouts, remember LNT so let's not do that...").

One of the things discussed at my recent training was that we probably should not be using any wood large enough to require an axe (this was brought up while we are learning proper care and handling of such). Are there others?

[perdidochas]

IMHO, LNT is starting to go too far.  The only thing that makes sense not to geotag are things like the locations of rare flora and fauna that people may want to collect illegally.  I don't think there is anything unethical or non-LNT about geotagging a scenic vista. 

[NJCubScouter]

On the geotagging thing... I don't use Instagram and I have never geotagged anything so it is conceivable that I do not understand what is being discussed here... but the upshot seems to be that we shouldn't be telling people how to find things in the backcountry.  By that logic, shouldn't we eliminate all trail maps, too?  So we can just stumble around and find places on our own so they won't have too many visitors?  There also seems to be a certain amount of arrogance involved here... you found a great place, maybe even a "secret" place (an interesting concept, unless the spot is on your own property), but you don't want the great unwashed masses finding it and messing it up. (And maybe you didn't find it on your own, someone else told you where it was, but the secret goes no further because, after all, you're special?)

Or am I misinterpreting this?

Edited June 28, 2018 by NJCubScouter

[CalicoPenn]

It seems to me that Leave No Trace has either jumped the shark because they've fulfilled their mission and are now just flailing around looking for things to comment on or are admitting that they are an elitist group whose real mission is to keep everyone away from the wilderness.

I read these guidelines - I'm laughing at the suggestion that if one really has to geo-tag a location they've found particularly impressive to just tag the state.  Yeah - that certainly will work to keep those locations a secret - "Hey - check out this pond I found in Illinois - I'm just going to tell you its in Illinois but it's definitely worth it for you to go visit - good luck finding where in the 57,915 square miles of Illinois it is.

 

 

[Hawkwin]

40 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

 

Or am I misinterpreting this?

No I think you got it.

And, I am not really concerned about the geotagging thing but the article got me wondering other things that are perhaps more directly damaging, like the gathering of firewood.

We also discussed, as part of our class, that we treat invasive species, like Japanese Honeysuckle, differently than Poison Ivy. LNT would have us leave Poison Ivy where it grows (in the wild) even if it is damaging other plants and trees.

[CalicoPenn]

14 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

No I think you got it.

And, I am not really concerned about the geotagging thing but the article got me wondering other things that are perhaps more directly damaging, like the gathering of firewood.

We also discussed, as part of our class, that we treat invasive species, like Japanese Honeysuckle, differently than Poison Ivy. LNT would have us leave Poison Ivy where it grows (in the wild) even if it is damaging other plants and trees.

Poison Ivy (and Oak and Sumac) are native plants to North America, not imported to the US like Japanese Honeysuckle.  I can understand why it would be treated differently than an invasive.

[Jameson76]

There are definitely some LNT zealots out there.  Can we all do a better job of lessening our impact while camping, absolutely.  If you were camping in the 60' and 70's as the low impact became the thing, the thought was to not camp where others had camped as that would lessen the impact, no designated sites, it's gonna be great.  Well, you ended up with impact all over an area.  Now rangers and whatnot have realized that if you can direct the impact, you can in fact lessen the overall impact.  Impact the crud out of this area, but it lessens the impact elsewhere

The challenge is for people (normal everyday people and not those that camp for a living) to appreciate public lands, they need to have access to the public lands.  These people pay the taxes that support that, eliminating ability to visit the lands (and oh no impact them) will make them less valuable and relevant.

Geotag all you want.  More people that are excited to visit, more potential tax money.

[mashmaster]

I am all for LNT, even taken special training for it but they can easily go overboard.   Sometimes reminds me of the fad diets that focus on only eating one item.

[qwazse]

I follow one wilderness FB page (all-volunteer). It astounds me the number of people who ask for the coords to one feature (unnamed on the trail maps) at the heart of 64 sq miles.

It astounds me that in this day of indexed browsers that they even have to ask. But it astounds me even more because the way I navigated to the place was to look for where the contour lines were closest together and chart a course via where the lines were were farthest apart. That gave me a good idea of where to expect to find a cairn.

It simply never crossed my mind to ask anyone if they thought my approach was a good one.

Lots of folks post pics of that one feature, but I prefer the ones of their feet in the rocks and bogs leading up to it!

[DuctTape]

The biggest issue for most people with LNT, is they try to codify the principles into hard-fast rules. LNT, is not about don't do this, the principles and guidelines are for understanding how one's decisions and actions impact the environment and may affect others safety and enjoyment of the area. The principles are not rules, but a guide to help us make decisions while in tbe backcountry. For example, to lessen impact while hiking, single file on established trails is better but spread out  very wide while on an off-trail bushwhack is better. The conditions and circumstances matter. I think the principles embodied in LNT are a perfect application of the BSA mission as it is a practical application of making ethical decisions. 

[69RoadRunner]

This attitude is, WE can go here, but you cannot.  This is for us, the truly worthy.

This isn't Leave No Trace.  It's Leave.  Period.

[DuctTape]

2 hours ago, 69RoadRunner said:

This attitude is, WE can go here, but you cannot.  This is for us, the truly worthy.

This isn't Leave No Trace.  It's Leave.  Period.

I disagree. Nothing in the LNT statements, nor the author of that article state no one else can visit. Both suggest being mindful of how geo-tagging and posting specific locations especially with gps coordinates can (and have) led to a negative impact on the area. This ethic is common for fisherman who recommend not posting on social media specific locations. Again, it isn't saying you can't go there or not tell anyone about it, only recognize how posting certain information on social media will lead to the destruction of what made that spot special to begin with. Be mindful, and make ethical decisions.

[NJCubScouter]

26 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

I disagree. Nothing in the LNT statements, nor the author of that article state no one else can visit. Both suggest being mindful of how geo-tagging and posting specific locations especially with gps coordinates can (and have) led to a negative impact on the area. This ethic is common for fisherman who recommend not posting on social media specific locations. Again, it isn't saying you can't go there or not tell anyone about it, only recognize how posting certain information on social media will lead to the destruction of what made that spot special to begin with. Be mindful, and make ethical decisions.

I think the "tone" of the article goes beyond your reasonable approach.

[SSScout]

Part of Scouting, it seems to me, is the concept of "safe exploring".   I have gone places even my 24 year old son has not, but he will go places I cannot.   Leading Cubs on exploring hikes (see that cut tree?  A beaver did that.) is an example.  The cocoon of modern life is a sad thing, methinks.  

Back in my day, it was not unusual for my folks to just say "be back in time for dinner"  and me and my buddy would go  off along the Northwest Branch to turn over rocks looking for crawdads.  Rare it is today that urbane parents allow their 7 year old that luxury.  

Geotagging? Is that the nature version of Pikachu Go ?   Another way to fill empty bandwidth?    When Alpha Centauri finally receives all this radio noise, how will they interpret it?  Ach du Lieber. 

What is the mimeograph equivalent of GPS ? 

"Oh,  nobody goes there any more. It's too crowded."      =  Yogi Berra = 

[DuctTape]

2 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

I think the "tone" of the article goes beyond your reasonable approach.

There is a body of research that suggests "tone" is often shifted negatively by the reader. A neutral tone is interpreted as generally negatively; a generally positive tone is interpreted as neutrail, etc... I believe this is due in part to lack of other cues such as body language and the actual tone of voice of a speaker. This is even more  common in digital communication, email, online forums, etc... Understanding this phenomenon, I give deference to the writer.