catapult magazine

catapult magazine
 

discussion

Camping -- Impact, Low-impact, NO-impact

Default

dan
Aug 30 2006
02:07 pm

i know i’ve been talking a lot on this thread but i’d like to say one more thing about the idea of ‘no trace camping’ when we look at it in big perspective.
CAMPING AS WE KNOW IT IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT even if you leave no trace at your campsite. Here are some examples:
you usually need a car to get to your camping area. In order to enjoy the wilderness you are contributing to climate change. Staying at home and reading a book is better for the earth.
-outdoor enthusiasts buy extraordinary amounts of gear (tents, stoves, backpacks, boats, tarps, specialty clothing and shoes, etc) the production of which is often harmful to the environment (usually in a place like China which is now taking the brunt of our ‘post-industrial’ hypocrisy
-our rivers and air are cleaner now because their rivers and air are dirtier). Plus, the stuff gets outdated and fills up landfills with plastic, nylon, fibreglass…

I myself very much enjoy hiking, canoeing, and camping and I find that these activities are good for my soul. But like most aspects of my energy-intensive existence, my pleasure comes at a cost to the earth. (and thanks to the low wages of those who make my clothes and gear in China)

Finally, I’d like to share with you a translated portion of Friedensreich Hundertwasser’s "The Sacred Shit Manifesto":

Shit turns into earth which is put on the roof
it becomes lawn, forest, garden
shit becomes gold.
The circle is closed,
there is no more waste
Shit is our soul

So when you relieve yourself in the forest, think of it as a gift.

Default

ilovealbertabeef
Jul 02 2009
03:58 pm

Default

ilovealbertabeef
Jul 02 2009
04:00 pm

dan – off hand, is that a real quote? how would i best footnote it?

Default

eddie
Jul 02 2009
04:06 pm

beef—good question. we will revisit this soon i hope. i’d like to use that.