The case for mule tape (and a comparative analysis)

[adam.skinner]

Consider me duly chastised.

[GreatBigDave]

I'm sorry for my tone, please forgive me.

This discussion is fair but the subject is complex, too complex for our sound-bite, black and white world. Rule makers and enforcers tend to act and react in absolutes. It appears that 1" straps give us a foothold in the "That's OK, hammocks are OK" thought-space of those that can hurt our hobby. We don't want the same folks to start thinking "That hurts trees, hammocks are bad". In public lands, it's social more than science.

Are we OK?

[rhjanes]

Interesting discussion. I played around with some mule tape in my back yard. I also asked a well respected vendor if they'd consider making some hardware to fit the half inch mule tape, just like the 1 inch straps. The vendor basically said, not going there. I have used the same two trees in my back yard, for probably 50 test hangs of hammocks and tarps. One a Chinaberry and another a cedar. I hardly ever noticed any damage to either tree using the 1 inch webbing straps. But after two hangs with the mule tape, damage to the tree, noticeable damage. And I was wrapping the tape around the tree two to three times also. Using my hardware also. So, I decided to order some Kevlar 1 inch straps from Dutch and go back to using bling. The Kevlar isn't quite as light as the mule tape, but that's ok.
Just MHO.

[mophead]

I wasn't trying to sound like a jerk about it. Sorry if it came across that way. Theres a lot of factors at work: user weight, tree species, hang angle, tree circumference etc. But suffice it to say that on public land this is an issue where "perception is reality" and Dave did a good job of explaining the situation in that respect so no reason to drone on about it for me.

[adam.skinner]

As I've used the mule tape more, I've encountered fraying in it. I've also had it go a little wild and kinky.

I really like the use of the slippery sheet bend, and that part seems to work just as well with standard 1" webbing. I find myself gravitating towards the 10'-12' webbing more than the mule tape.

I think I'll likely keep some mule tape in the kit anyway, as a useful extender.

[mophead]

I've also had it go a little wild and kinky.

Hey hey! Now we're talking! Maybe I could drop a few lbs and squeak by on sgt rocks new paradigm.

On a marginally more serious note- I've been messing with a becket hitch with Amsteel on a continuous loop of 1/2 inch strap. Basically AGG's set up but with the roles of Amsteel and mule tape switched (using a tree strap w/ the Amsteel) I am not seeing nearly the same wear on the Amsteel compare to the normal method since its the strap thats being compressed by the amsteel and not the other way around. Requires some sort of toggle in the loop but I needed one with mule tape anyway.

[SGT Rock]

To the 1/2" as a tree strap, I hung my hammock multiple times with it in my yard. The trees never showed any signs of dying. One did eventually get blown over in a bad thunderstorm, but started blooming even on the ground before I cut it out. And they were both fairly small trees.

I think that 1/2" is probably enough for most people anyway. I've heard for years the "but we do it for the politics, so we don't lose our ability to hang". OK, hands up, who has ever had some official come up and measure the width of your tree straps? I never have. The places I've heard of banning it do so out of ignorance anyway, they could care less how wide you make your straps. The truth is we are the ones that hang all the time and are the keepers of the knowledge. Let me point out this blast from the pat to use as an example: https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/...ng-guide-lines go to about post 7. But to save some of you who don't want to go read it all here is what I am pointing to:

"Hello Grant,

Thanks for your question. Our Leave No Trace education expert, Ben Lawhon, is out of the office right now, but I found an email he wrote to another one of our members who asked a similar question. I hope this helps. If you have any further questions, please contact Ben directly. His information will appear at the end of his message.

Thanks, Katie
---
From Ben,

Thanks for your interest in Leave No Trace. Let me start by saying that we (the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics) do not have a recommendation either for or against tents and/or hammocks. We advocate for enjoying the outdoors responsibly.

The biggest different is that when properly used, hammocks can eliminate much of the impact generally associated with tent camping. When tent camping, you are impacting a larger area just by the sheer nature of a tent’s size and the additional impact of sleeping pads, sleeping bags and the campers inside.

As long as ‘tree saver straps’ (2-4” wide straps that go around the tree to minimize any girdling effects) are used, there is very little impact associated with hammock camping. Besides getting in and out of the hammock, the ground beneath is almost untouched. Additionally, a hammock allows for greater flexibility when choosing a campsite. When looking for a tent site, level ground is generally preferred. However, with a hammock, one can essentially camp wherever there are trees. This could be on a steep slope, over boulders, snow or other surface the might not be suitable for tent camping.

There is a book that you may find useful, and one that we helped review and provide Leave No Trace information for: Hammock Camping – A Guide to the New Comfort, Convenience and Freedom In the Great Outdoors, Written by Wade Edward Speer (I put the smilie in there, not LNT)

If you have additional questions or need more information, feel free to contact me directly.

Best,
Ben Lawhon
Education Director
Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics
P.O. Box 997, Boulder, CO 80306
1.800.332.4100
P: 303.442.8222 x104
F: 303.442.8217
http://www.LNT.org
--
Katie Jones
Information Coordinator
Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics
PO Box 997
Boulder, CO 80306
P: 303.442.8222 X100
F: 303.442.8217
http://www.LNT.org"

This is from 2009 and I have bolded the section I wish to highlight. It 2009 LNT (which is actually a corporation, not some all knowing scientific research group) though you needed 2"-4" straps! Who the hell sells that? Now flash forward to 2015 (I don't know when the policy actually changed): https://lnt.org/blog/hammock-camping

3) As long as ‘tree saver' straps (1-1.5” wide straps that go around the tree to minimize any girdling effects) are used, there is very little impact associated with hammock camping. Besides getting in and out of the hammock, the ground beneath is almost untouched. - See more at: https://lnt.org/blog/hammock-camping....UcGmRyHF.dpuf

Somewhere in time they cut the recommendation to what was actually on the market. I guess someone educated them. I bet it was from listening to one, or many of us.

So why bring that up? Well I think the "common wisdom" is currently something we are all passing along without examining what the real results are. Back in 2000-2001 (maybe later) there were no tree straps and we lashed hammocks to trees with multiple wraps of cord. I use a method I call the figure 8 where I spread out the tension across two loops of 1/2" on small trees and just go with one wrap round the large trees because there is more strap over a larger area to dissipate the tension. A few years ago I wrote about this and was lambasted by the "common wisdom" crowd for not knowing what I was doing. I figured at that point there was no purpose in posting here and went on my way. 2-1/2 years later it looks like some of the community is now ready to listen to the ideas I've been using for years now. It reminds me of older issues like Sil-nylon (it was too flammable to be safe and people were going to die), hiking poles (they were eroding trails to the point they were not going to be hikable in 10 years), and cell phones (they were going to ruin everyone's backcountry experience). Takes some people time to adjust to new ideas.

Anyhow, I know some are going to rail against what I say. I could care less. Maybe some will listen.

[FJRpilot]

So I think the beauty of all of this is that we each get to choose our own equipment based on our own observations, perceptions, experiences and preferences. To each his own. At the end of the day, no one should criticize another for the choices he/she makes from the hammock they choose to lie in, to the suspension they choose to hang it with. At one time, "Hammockers" tended to be individualists and that's what spawned the innovation that we have all benefited from.. I for one really enjoy the discussions and perceptions others take the time to share... We are listening...

[mophead]

I was admittedly a little zealous in my statements before in regard to 1/2 in straps by saying "everyone should use 1" straps." because 1" is an arbitrary line in the sand and I was aware of that. I have been asked not to hang in one park while section hiking, but you've got a point in that it's done out of ignorance. I have had issues with the same park on at least three different instances. I think Dejoha was the force behind the LNT reduction. From another thread:

This article came out a while back, but I came across it again and did a double-take after reading the Leave No Trace Center's recommendations on hammock camping, particularly the size of the webbing straps.

LNT recommends straps at least 2-inches wide and up to 4-inches wide.

I've known Ben, the LNT Education Director, for a few years now, so I got in touch with him about the statement. He said that the recommendation comes from discussions from different land agents (presumably their partners at National Parks, Forest Service, etc.).

We had a good back-and-forth and he did agree to update the post to include 1.5-inch webbing, but that's about as far as he would push it.

It is an interesting revelation, especially with what I'm seeing as a trend here on HF with folks looking to get narrower and narrower straps (e.g., 0.75-inch Mule Tape or 0.5-inch strap). I think we should proceed with caution in this vein because of the potential PR damage we could make for ourselves. New hangers in particular will be looking for the recommended standards in which to operate.

On this topic, I think it is in our best interest to look at some sort of scientific study on strap use, tree damage, etc., to provide the best recommendations to land agents and camp hosts, etc. From my own observations, there is a lot of subjective opinion out there on strap usage, what works best, and what doesn't. It would be nice to have an objective study done that could put some of these questions to rest.

Thoughts?

the thread is forever long as this subject usually gets that way and I never have found any truly scientific study on anything related to this. The best we have is individual trial and error, but a lot of people don't really understand the issue and claim there was no damage when they don't even know what they're looking for.

Didn't mean any disrespect to sgt rock. I was around back when 2in was the recommended min. and thought it was ridiculous. I had tried the 1/2 inch thing but decided against it for a number of reasons, risk of tree damage was one of them. Once I realized they compromised to 1in I figured it was reasonable to encourage the arbitrary 1in min just for the sake of good publicity but people should feel free to experiment within reason.

[SGT Rock]

No disrespect taken. I admit I don't know everything and the older I get, the more suspicious I am of people who think they do. Often they simply repeat what they have heard others say. I freely admit I may be wrong on this and would respect anyone that had evidence to the contrary.

When I was an owner/administrator at Whiteblaze.net I often felt that I should enforce the "common wisdom" in things like water treatment, bear bagging, etc. The longer I did it, the more I realized that this "common wisdom" was an illusion. My favorite example of this is the snake bite kit. When I started hiking in the 70's no wise hiker would go out without this contraption. Common wisdom was you needed it to combat the ever present danger of snake bites for you and others. Hell, the wisdom back then was also to kill every venomous snake you saw because it might bite someone else. But when you look at the actual instances of snake bite, and the general circumstances of them when they did occur the smart person would have laughed it as a silly set of notions. Then add to that the absolute uselessness of a snake bite kit...

I don't know if they even sell those now. These days we are smarter than that. Thank God.

Move on to 2015 and if I point out the same flaws in the need for filters in the back country I will be labeled as a danger to myself and others for propagating the idea that a filter is a totally useless piece of gear that was artificially turned into a necessity by marketing hype of people who sell them for a living. The fact that people who use them don't get sick is a confidence trick when you realize the science says that the chance of you actually encountering giardia in the back country is very low. "BUT THERE IS A CHANCE" scream the Common Wisdom repeaters!. I don't use them and haven't for over 40 years (well there are those two trips in 2002 when I was doing a product test/review). What gets most people sick would best be prevented by bleach, hand washing, and simple precautions when sharing food - but that is cheap and easy. Even if you point to scientific data there will be people that have repeated it themselves so many times they are more invested in not being wrong than admitting that the data is against them. I freely own it and admit that I was one of them years ago. But then again, I don't blame anyone for doing what makes them feel comfortable. If a filter makes you happy, then by all means take it. But don't get self righteous when people advise it isn't necessary. I've got a theory that water treatment/filtering/etc is like a religion and when you challenge someone's belief it is like challenging their faith...

The internet is full of people that have more posts than miles on the trail that get self righteous when you poke holes in their "common wisdom". I thought of selling silver crosses as a hiker necessity in order to protect yourself from vampires. As proof I can say that I have always carried a cross and have never been bothered by a vampire. And I can dig up historical data proving that people in the past have used crosses against the perceived real threat. But we all know the truth in that one: vampires are not a real thread.

But back to 1/2" straps. I think that using them must be done with some respect to situation. Same with bear bagging. Same with water treatment. Same with snakes