3 ms·

I'm concerned by the fact that he allows himself to go to such a place without applying the precept "Leave no trace". In my opinion if you want to preserve wild

by cake 17y ago

I'm concerned by the fact that he allows himself to go to such a place without applying the precept "Leave no trace". In my opinion if you want to preserve wild areas like this one, it is very important to respect it no matter what. You would find it charming but I would find it sad. We don't know who else might visit this area and by what frequency, just by respect for other people who may not be pleased by such a gesture and because he doesn't own the place he shouln'd have done that. It really seems just like a basic outdoor camping rule to me.

anamax 17y ago
> I'm concerned by the fact that he allows himself to go to such a place without applying the precept "Leave no trace". You can't "leave no trace". The animals that noticed you behave differently now. Your footprints diverted an insect. (And, if you were riding a horse, the water that pooled in the hoof prints kept a Texas Ranger alive.) Your "waste" poisoned one thing and provided nutrients to another. You can argue that these things don't count, but the line isn't as bright as your aesthetic revulsion requires.