I've had some pine tree roots take serious offence to my tent stakes by leaking pine sap on them. Really nasty stuff and awful to try and get rid of it. I try to stay away from pine trees now but if I can't, I'm carefull when pushing my stakes into the ground. If it feels like I'm hitting a root, I pull the stake, move it to another spot.
as stated it makes no difference whether ropes hurt the tree onr not. If the public the eco folk and the "authorities"( who are they?) think they hurt the tree, then for all practicle purposes that is the perception, and it becomes the new truth! therefoe we must keep our straps out and visible, facts are not important, what is generally thought (CW) is the new reality. it is that kind "O world friends! gnome
The straps with my Whoopies, and to a lesser degree when I use a carabiner with webbing ( WBBB for ex) seem to come much closer to "girdling", or would if ropes were used.
It is not that uncommon for me to take some bark off of pine trees using straps. I have about quit worrying about that ( except in developed campgrounds) after considering the damage that animals regularly do to trees in the wild. I got to observe a lot more bear claw and moose/deer/elk whatever antler damage than I am used to seeing, in Alaska/Yukon recently. Some of this damage was pretty spectacular.
But, as already stated, perception is important to our future. Can you imagine if one day we read that hanging is banned in National Forests? A ranger who might enthusiastically point out tree damage by an animal (as an ex. of nature at work) might be quite alarmed by me knocking some bark off a tree. Which is why I am more concerned with some bark loss at a developed camp ground I go to. Right now, no restrictions what so ever. I'd like to keep it that way. ( BTW, I have never asked the rangers, I just hang. They have seen me doing it, and never commented except to express amazement that I didn't freeze after I slept "in that thing" when it was so cold the night before!)
Apparently, signature that I used from 2006 no longer tolerated so now deleted.
JJ, Youngblood and others make a good point on the perceptions of others, especially those who can and have shut down parks and areas to hanging...
Failure to use strapping on trees starts one on the slippery slope of minimum protection or specific definitions, all of which are more likely than not to eventually increase the hanging bans.
Example is a 1/2 inch rope ok,3/16 amstell, 7mm, 6mm,5mm,4mm,3mm,2mm...zing it? and then there is the, "Hey I only weigh 135 lbs, 150,160,175,200, 227, 275, 299 etc... Take that times the infinate variety of rope diameters and weaves is one huge number... Grizz know the actual number...
All in all... We are should all get together on the use of straps..."For surely if we do not 'hang' together on this we will all hang separately"...NOT
Ounces to Grams.
www.jacksrbetter.com ... Largest supplier of camping quilts and under quilts...Home of the Original Nest Under Quilt, and Bear Mountain Bridge Hammock. 800 595 0413
“Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall when the wise are banished from the public councils because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.” ~Judge Joseph Story
- My site: http://www.tothewoods.net/
- Designer, Jeff's Gear Hammock / Pack Cover by JRB
IMPOSSIBLE JUST TAKES LONGER
I have read this thread and have an observation/statement to propose!!!!!!!! Bear with me this could all be wrong...................
I am a large fella, do most of my camping/hanging in the Piney wood/Hard wood forests of Alabama and use straps to hang all of my hammocks. I was taught, in school, that the bark of a tree was the outer protection of the nutrient flowing "flesh" of the inner tree.
When I hang my hammock I do what essentially boils down to a "choker" loop around the tree using my straps, I have loops sewn into the straps and run the tag end of the strap through this loop then to my CB's on the hammock. I do not choke the strap down on the tree. With pine trees there is a dense bark covering of the pulpy "flesh" of the tree and conversely there is a thinner bark covering the pulpy "flesh" portion of an Oak tree. I am to understand that while I am hanging in my hammock I might possibly be strangling the tree from it nutrients........ but I dont see how that is possible!!!!!!!!
The bark/flesh make-up of the tree should compensate for ther effect that me and my straps are having on the nutrient flow through the tree. I mean to say that a pine with thick bark "soft" wood and an oak with thin bark "hard" wood are naturally built to keep the nutrient enriched fluids flowing. I do not know what the compressive forces would be on the tree but would it really be enough to stop the nutrient flow to all of the tree?????
I mean lets face it, I dont believe that we are applying enough force to stop all of the nutrients or even 1/4 of the nutrients flowing through a tree for the amount of time that we are hanging in our hammocks. If that were the case then trees would be dying around us as we are laying in our hammocks.
Par Si Vis Pace Para Bellum
I'm really not trying to sound preachy here, so if I come across that way, I apologize.
It's not so much that you're strangling the tree right then. Any cambium damage doesn't always sponge back out as soon as you take your hammock down. The vessels are more like pipes and less like garden hoses.
A couple of anecdotal tidbits:
1: I felled a tree once and missed my drop zone and ended up scraping an adjacent tree pretty badly. It only scraped the bark off in a couple of small spots, but we ended up having to take the tree down when it started dropping sheets of bark months later, after dropping most of it's leaves in the middle of summer.
2: Once saw a bulldozer scar that went probably 1/3 of the way round a 10"-ish oak. The following year, that whole side of the tree didn't leaf out.
3: not so much a story, but I've seen Tulip Poplars with 3" thick bark, and heard about Redwoods with bark over a foot thick! Those particular trees would probably be fine without tree huggers, (might have to with the size of the redwood!) But generally speaking, there are way too many variables (species, age, and season being the main ones) to not bother with tree huggers.
Like Dutch offered, I'll make you a set if you like, just PM me your addy.
It's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Formerly known as Acercanto, my trail name is MacGuyver to some, and Pucker Factor to others.
It's not procrastinating, its proactively delaying the implementation of the energy-intensive phase of the project until the enthusiasm factor is at its maximum effectiveness. - Randy Glasbergen