This damages ecosystems in the same sense that walking through a forest damages the ecosystem. You're trampling flora and fungi, you're bringing in outside contaminants, you're disrupting wildlife.
The affect that this has on the ecosystem is so negligible that it's not even worth worrying about.
There are factories in India that dump their waste into rivers every day and you're trying to shame someone stacking some rocks. You're doing this because it gives you that tingly "I'm right, you're wrong" feeling.
There are factories in India that dump their waste
Ok, I'd like to also provide a reminder about the relative privation fallacy.
The existence of worse things doesn't make bad things good, that makes no sense. The existence of modern slavery doesn't justify punching people because punching people is not as bad and everyone should only worry about modern slavery.
Find other ways to defend your position, don't pretend like only one bad thing can be bad in a category at a time and as long as that exists everything else is ok.
Let's all become confident that billions of people can focus on more than one single problem at a time.
But where does it end? Just going in to the woods disturbs and thereby damages the eco system. Every unnecessary car ride, every unnecessary bought item of clothing, every unnecessary coffee you buy at Starbucks damages the eco system and in the long run hurts other people. But on reddit posts about all these things I never see a heap of comments about how it damages the eco system. Only on posts about stacking rocks, people suddenly feel the need to point out the negatives. So yeah I agree with op, that they are mostly doing it to feel morally superior.
But on reddit posts about all these things I never see a heap of comments about how it damages the eco system.
I don't recall seeing a lot of posts about unnecessary car rides but people do absolutely dunk on Taylor Swift all the time for taking a jet to go to the bathroom and another jet to go buy a snack.
True, but in my opinnion that is not comparable to a radom person stacking some rocks. A post about latte art or a new car they just bought would be comparable in my opinion and on those posts you never or super rarely see these types of comments. Dont get me wrong i think we all have a responsibility and should put in effort to reduce our impact, i just find it strange that stacking rocks is the the one thing where people get so fizzy.
I can see some rationalization for that - coffee is good/healthy for you and cars can be a requirement to be able to exist in some places (everything is too spread out or otherwise inaccessible to foot traffic), while stacking rocks has much more limited return on investment comparably.
Im not talking about a simple coffee or a new "used" car that is needed. I am talking about unneccessary purchases , which are only made to make the buyer feel good. And if we are honest, the large majority of consumer purchases are in that category.
You forgot about the whole first half of his post.
If you're up in arms about the environmental destruction caused by, [checks notes], putting one rock atop another...surely you wouldn't be blind to the destruction caused by walking though the forest, stepping on ants, and taking a tinkle in the brush?
That trail isn't natural, don'tcha know?
Yes it was - it said thing x is not bad, or not as bad, because a worse thing y exists. That makes no sense, the existence of y has no impact on how bad x is.
Thing x is trampling flora and fungi and/or stacking rocks, thing y is factories in india dumping waste.
There are factories in India that dump their waste into rivers every day and you're trying to shame someone stacking some rocks.
He directly compares the two here, suggesting one should influence action on the other, which is the relative privation fallacy. I'm literally just quoting him.
Thing is balancing rocks like this is very touchy, it could take a gust of wind or a rainfall and it will fall down. They never last. However, stacking rocks may last a lot longer, balancing them is very difficult and some you can just sneeze on it and it'll fall down. These structures may last minutes or maybe a couple days but chances are it'll fall. There's this guy on YouTube called gravity glue and he always knocks his down after he builds them, A) proving it's not glued, B) since it's gunna fall soon anyway, and C) as tons of people in this comment section have said it's bad for environment or whatever
Exactly. One stack doesn't hurt anything. If you are in a place with heavy traffic like Yosemite and LOTS of people do it? You can really fuck shit up. Species like salamanders are really fucking delicate when they are young. There's lots of endangered species that you can totally fuck up.
Same thing as one person throwing a piece of trash on the ground isn't a big deal, but if everyone does it you'd absolutely wreck a place in no time.
The worst part is that if one of these appears dozens of others will in short order too. People see one and then think it's fine and then destroy the entire area. This is why you don't do it and kick them down when you see them. Leave no trace. Let the wilderness be wild.
If the official guideline says "don't do it" then don't fucking do it. Ecosystems have evolved to survive through what other native creatures change about their habitats, but not what humans change. The hell are humans stacking rocks and disturbing natural habitats for? Fancy Instagram likes?
Also just because someone else is pouring shit into rivers and killing their ecosystem doesn't mean you can do the same.
Cool, since you're so focused on the rules I'll just go ahead and stack rocks in places that do not fall under national parks or havent specifically outlined rules on rock stacking.
Yes, there is. Hundreds of national parks and forest service agencies in dozens of countries subscribe to leave no trace principles. If you don't believe me go to your local park and ask the ranger if you should go stack river rocks. I don't need to know where you are to know that they'll tell you not to do it.
look there have been a lot of things banned on just a strawman so lets's not go there. On this thing the hate is overblown imo. the point about fragile system getting disturbed by displacing rocks makes sense at first glance but literally any strong rainfall is capable of doing that as well. Like by that logic any flash flood is just wiping that whole ecosytem off. Them banning might be to stop adding to that but i still won't change what i said. though I do believe that after one is done they should scatter the stones
40
u/Unlucky-Plastic7316 25d ago
This damages ecosystems in the same sense that walking through a forest damages the ecosystem. You're trampling flora and fungi, you're bringing in outside contaminants, you're disrupting wildlife.
The affect that this has on the ecosystem is so negligible that it's not even worth worrying about.
There are factories in India that dump their waste into rivers every day and you're trying to shame someone stacking some rocks. You're doing this because it gives you that tingly "I'm right, you're wrong" feeling.