Lamont wrote:When it's clear they are an "artistic statement" (-someone said that to me once), I push them over, scatter them carefully.
They are often the bush equivalent of the city "tag".
north-north-west wrote:
It's not just the visual intrusion; by moving rocks to create cairns or stacks, you disturb the vegetative growths on and around them (mosses, lichens etc) and remove shelter from small reptiles and invertebrates that live under the rocks.
kitty wrote:Id like to know what others think, why do people make them? Do you like them?
north-north-west wrote:Small navigational or summit cairns where necessary - fine. Rock stacking because you're bored poo... and/or can't cope with unaltered nature - get out and don't come back until you've learnt the principles of MIB and LNT.
It's not just the visual intrusion; by moving rocks to create cairns or stacks, you disturb the vegetative growths on and around them (mosses, lichens etc) and remove shelter from small reptiles and invertebrates that live under the rocks.
Heremeahappy1 wrote:Cairns everywhere on the Viking circuit. Many are no longer there. Each trip I continue to remove them. It is an irrelevant and unrequired imposition on the nature of 'wilderness areas' in particular. Like pink tape and blazes on trees. Dont do it. I will continue to remove tape and cairns, you may keep you map and compass however.
geoskid wrote:north-north-west wrote:It's not just the visual intrusion; by moving rocks to create cairns or stacks, you disturb the vegetative growths on and around them (mosses, lichens etc) and remove shelter from small reptiles and invertebrates that live under the rocks.
NNW, I had heard that some people were concerned at this level of detail, but, how do you reconcile this sentence with your actions as an off track walker, peak bagger, and gardener of necessity in pursuit of the afore mentioned activities. it's easier for me, because cairns don't bother me - at all!
Heremeahappy1 wrote:When we apply individual discretion as to the importance of a cairn, we arrive back to the initial idea that some like cairns for art and others for direction, warning, notifying. It is opinion whether a cairn is important for direction and opionions are like handkerchiefs - everyone has one. Some are of the opinion navigation is an art.
Mark F wrote:I am also in the "don't" camp but would suggest not removing cairns that are important markers known and used by many walkers or written about in route descriptions...
ribuck wrote:Mark F wrote:I am also in the "don't" camp but would suggest not removing cairns that are important markers known and used by many walkers or written about in route descriptions...
Everyone who disapproves of the cairn can remove one stone as they pass. Everyone who wants the cairn can add one stone.
Democracy in action, and no sudden disappearance of cairns which might be relied on.
ribuck wrote:Mark F wrote:I am also in the "don't" camp but would suggest not removing cairns that are important markers known and used by many walkers or written about in route descriptions...
Everyone who disapproves of the cairn can remove one stone as they pass. Everyone who wants the cairn can add one stone.
Democracy in action, and no sudden disappearance of cairns which might be relied on.
Nuts wrote:The management authorities all have some form of minimal impact policy (perhaps besides Qld). 'Leave rocks and logs where they are', 'don't erect cairns or blaze trees'.. that sort of thing. It's interesting that we even think there is room for some sort of personal choice in this.
Tekker76 wrote:Like the rise of tattoos, the latest generations need to squiggle their mark on stuff. Probably a reaction to not having the same economic opportunities. I don't find either thing necessary, but nor does it bother me, insofar as they aren't destroying stuff or damming creeks.
Return to Bushwalking Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests