Arkansas Canoe Club Forums

Richard, sounds like a good plan for the Buffalo floats

This all sounds like _______ to me! BTW, Clif, being the designated pooh carrier gets you out of lot other nasty work! Dave, if I am on the trip, I volunteer. Depending on the water level and the section, I might have either the Mohole (solo) or the raft.

Try being the guy that sets up and breaks down a 120 mm rocket box/toilet on a trip of 20 people for 8 days/7 nights!

As they so eloquently said in one of my 'British Comedy's', several years ago, "why that's a load of poopy-pops".

Jim Moose

Roger, you are a good man! Lets see what Richard comes up with.

Thanks for stepping up!

I'm amazed this thread had grown this long.

What was wrong with the bio-degradable bags anyway?

I’m concerned that what you are doing is just digging a latrine, with the Luggable Loo serving only as a very temporary holding container.

The Buffalo National River guideline found in their “Currents” publication recommends the use of catholes, conversely, latrines are not mentioned.
I believe that latrines are the technique we were taught 30 years ago, but are not consistent with the recommendations of most wilderness managers today.

While you can find information both pro and con latrine on the internet, one of the best discussions I found was here: http://www.nols.edu/resources/research/ ... port99.pdf

Extracting what I believe to be some key words, I get:

“Where soil is available, sequestering feces in catholes appears to be the best practice (Reeves 1979, Temple and others 1982).”

“The digging and use of temporary latrines by backcountry visitors is almost always an inappropriate method for disposal. The larger the concentration of feces, the more time needed for decomposition (Reeves 1979) which increases both the liklihood that feces will be discovered by other visitors and that pathogens will come into contact with ground
water. However, with young children who may not be able to properly locate and dig catholes, it may be best to dig a small latrine. “

I have to vote, either “carry it out” or stick to the current Buffalo National River guideline, “individual catholes”. My offer to kick in on purchase price of either one of the PETT or EcoSafe systems stands.

Richard, I have never used the bags so I can't say but agreeing with cowper we always used cat holes. in a large group would thre be much difference in 20 or so catholes in a small area or 1 bigger hole?

"How to Defecate in the Woods" by Ms. Meyer doesn't provide much more guidance than what has already been mentioned. From her text -- cat holes are best on high ground, ideally 150-200 feet away from the nearest water source or campsite -- and in the case of the Buffalo River NP also far away from caves, sink holes and rock crevices too-- shallow hole in slightly moist humus-rich soil less than 8 inches deep for that is where the best bacteria are, mix and stir well some loose soil and the crap together to speed up bacterial die-off, cover with duff, compress gently and mask all evidence of crap's and crapper's presence. -- I like the big rock idea except that many small reptiles and amphibians use rocks for cover, don't seem very nice...and always carry out toilet paper, feminine products, etc. which are sure to be dug up by animals and scattered. Latrines are to be avoided where possible -- if a site is being overused -- all crap should be packed out be it in ammo box, milk carton or whatever.

In my opinion -- a considerable amount of waste can be left at any one time within an acre of land surrounding a campsite if folks use common sense and good practices. Nevertheless, I too will "pony up" a contribution to the purchase of a "washable, re-usable human waste carry-out system" for our larger groups to use -- I believe it sends out a statement that "we care".

Lastly, I really don't think we can really compare our crap with that of other animals. Sure deer and coons have giardia and such but animal waste typically contains far fewer pathogens capable of causing dysenteric diseases in humans than what we ourselves are capable of spreading.

ECO-Safe Toilet System (For Sale) Post #: 10943 Category: Accessories

One ECO-Safe Toilet System Used on one 3 day trip. Like NEW
Contact: Jerry Email: trottman1@charter.net
Phone: 541-899-1310 Location: Medford, Oregon
Posted: 12/4/2007 Price: $100.00 OBO

JUST LISTED>HURRY

Rio~

I have never used the bio bag system.

I was on a trip with some of my Kansas buds and they were going to use the bio bag system. Doing some checking, some of the river rangers do not accept the bio bag system. So, it pays to check the regulations on the specific river a person is planning on floating.

The Eco Safe system, on all the rivers I have checked so far, is accepted.

I have used the Eco Safe boom box unit on one overnight float with ten or so folks along and it works ok for a small party. I was not impressed enough with it to buy a system. My main concern was altho it is well constructed, it did not look bombproof to me. Whereas the Eco Safe plastic tank inside a rocket box has a long reputation of being pretty much bomber. The only weak point in the Eco Safe Rocket box system I have seen so far is the seat latch is easy to set up wrong but long as one pays attention it works really well.

I know rocket boxes are heavy, but if I am carrying a box of gas producing poo in my raft or whatever, I want to be sure the system is pretty much as leak proof as I can make it. So far, I have never seen a Eco Safe unit blow up in a rocket box. I have read stories tho of boaters using the old groover set up (IE- you just poop directly into the rocket box) having explosions when the seal failed in hot weather. I can only imagine what the clean up was like!

I been roaming around the woods for a long time and have always used the "cat hole" system. That was what my Dad taught me to use when I started hunting small game as a kiddo with him. We just found a spot with soft soil, using our boot heels we dug a little trench deep enough to hold the poo, did our deal, covered it up with the loose soil and tamped it down with our boots and went on our way. This was in North Georgia and there is plenty of dirt around the forests there to handle poo breakdown in the soil. Around soil like I see on most of the upper banks of the lower Buffalo, I think this is the way to go for individuals. This system does not work in my opinion on the typical Buffalo sandbar I have seen. IE, next big rain everything just washes into the river and little breakdown of the poo.

From what I have seen so far on the Buffalo floats I have been on, the use of a Eco Safe system is all around the best setup for the environment and group safety. It just seems the right way to go regardless of the ranger rules for that river. Some one mentioned to me that getting up, climbing the steep banks from the gravel bar to the soft soil and getting back to camp - was the most dangerous part of the trip. Older and less flexible I get, the more I agree with this.

I do not know where or even if there are Lower Buffalo dump sites. Maybe we can all do some research and make up a chart posted somewhere on the ACC Msg Board. I know out west on several occassions I have used a KOA setup. One time, the lady at the desk said no problem, just do the clean out. The other time I was charged 5 bucks. Must be what ever the local owner decides.

We can go a number of ways on this. I think Tris tho hit the target with his comment. To the effect we should be using a Eco Safe type unit and being really care full of the image we make. I know these trips are not official ACC events, but since most of us are ACC members, we do send a message.

My deal still stands, I got a eco safe system and I purchased it to be used. Long as I can get some help with the transport, setup etc (and already several of the Buffalo floating group have offered help) I can just toss the system in the back of my full sized V8 pickup.

Richard -- Without taking this great thread off on a tangent -- its evolution/adaption (you choose the word to use) that makes those human fecal coliforms and other bugs such nasty creatures. In the grand scheme of life's diversity there aren't that many species of bacteria that can live or cause disease in multiply hosts. Those that are adapted to live in deer tend to only live in deer for the commensal organisms found in ungulates is distinctly different than that seen in man and these organisms are specially adapted to living in deer and not people. However if they do cross over -- referred to as zoonoses -- it can be quite the problem. I remember I once had a patient that had a Xanthomonas infection of a type usually only seen in "hoofed animals" who apparently got the infection through an innoculum containing a lot of colony-forming units -- in this particular case by winning a bet to "suck the snot out of a mule" -- I kid you not! Nasty infection that was difficult to eliminate.

Infections that do not cross over are generally more responsive to public health measures. For example smallpox -- which probably started as a zoonoses (monkey pox) crossed over and adapted itself so that it could only survive in humans thus once all humans were vaccinated we effectively eliminated the organism from the face of the earth (outside of a few germ warfare laboratories). Meanwhile other diseases in which several types of animals can harbor the pathogen -- say tetanus, anthrax, malaria -- are likely to be with us a long time as we can't vaccinate mosquitos and such.

In my research into the "healing springs of Arkansas" it is apparent that settlement patterns in Arkansas and across the nation were strongly related to the availability of potable water and sanitation. What wiped out Jamestown was in many ways the result of dysenteric diseases (cholera and such) due to foul water -- both saline infiltration and human fecal contamination. The water was fine as long as it was just a bunch of animals -- but the combination of a drought and human fecal contamination spelled their doom -- mortality rates were 50% percent or more until a clean water supply was secured.

Now back to those "porta-potties" -- I think the motion has already been made and seconded -- but I'm offering my vote for the ACC in securing donations and procuring "washable, re-usable human waste carry-out systems" for our larger on-river group activities. All in favor say "crap".

. . . climbing the steep banks from the gravel bar to the soft soil and getting back to camp - was the most dangerous part of the trip.

This (Cat hole) system does not work in my opinion on the typical Buffalo sandbar I have seen. IE, next big rain everything just washes into the river and little breakdown of the poo.

Thats what prompted this thread in the first place.

All in favor say "crap".

Can't I just raise my right hand? . . . O.K. . . .Here goes . . . "Crap"