A question on integrated vs. external bug netting

[DuctTape]

I like having the bugnet as part of the hammock. I also treat my hammock and the attached bugnet with permethrin once a season. There is never a time I do not use the bugnet. I still use the bugnet even in winter. The netting does trap some heat. Enough so that condensation appears on the netting and off my down quilt. When i unzip the netting, I can feel a rush of colder air.

[rjcress]

I have a military bugnet that (i think) goes with the military pup tents, I got for $18 at a surplus store

rjcress is using the same thing...but just drapes over the rigeline

http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=23915
http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=24127

Not sure why those URLs don't work for me.

Actually, I suspend mine from the tarp ridgeline, which makes it even higher than the hammock ridgeline. Probably provides less heat retention that way, but gives me plenty of headroom when I sit up (I'm 6'4" with a long torso)

Here is mine from the inside. The tiny green string is the ridgeline:


If I hang close to the ground... which I tend to do since my first DIY hammock failed and dropped me on my backside... so hanging lower means less distance to fall , then the net touches the ground and also touches the periphery of the hammock, making a more effective seal than I expected. I haven't had any bugs get in the hammock with me while I'm in the hammock.

Once I get out of the hammock, the net no longer seals against the periphery of the hammock and bugs get in. So I have to open it up and let them out before I lay down for the night.

Just thought of something else. I had not added the tie-outs or shelf to my DIY BB yet last time I use the net. Not sure how it will work with the shelf and tie-outs.

While I'm still really new at this and don't have much experience to draw on, I think that this setup is a good compromise because I can get out easy, and it offers good protection while I'm sleeping. It was intended only as an interim solution until I get the rest of the hammock completed and the settle on the ridgeline length.
Then I'll be adding a permanent net to my DIY BB, so we'll see what feedback I have in a few weeks after using an integral net.

The military bugnet is bulky enough that I haven't tried leaving it on the hammock when I put the snake skins on. Maybe I'll try that next time.
I made my skins big so I can leave my thin fleece Under Un-Quilt on when in the skins. hmmm. an idea! Maybe I'll just make skins for the tarp, and roll the net up with the tarp in the skins. Then I don't have to untie the net from the ridgeline.

Heres another pic from outside the hammock:

[rjcress]

I think the consensus is to treat the bugnet and hammock with Pemethrin.

I both laughed and cringed when I read this.

Sorry that this is a bit tangential to the original question... but relevant to the bug protection theme.

Short explanation:
Please, Please! If you choose to use a chemical bug treatment on your gear, re-treat every time you go out.

Not short at all explanation:
I worked for an animal pharma company until recently, and our Parasitologists continually lamented the impact that infrequent treatment with parasisticides has on the insect population and the continued efficacy of the parasiticides.

When first applied in adequate dose the parasiticide (Permethrin, in this case) is effective at killing the bugs. ALL of them. However, over time, the potency diminishes to the point that some bugs, the ones with a higher resistance to the parasiticide (often attributed to mutation), are not killed by it. The classic natural selection scenario plays out, and we end up with a higher and higher percentage of bugs that have a higher level of resistance, and therefore, the parasiticide becomes less effective, and eventually useless.

On the individual level, it is easy to write this off as not applicable, as the time in a particular area, frequency of exposure, etc are unlikely to be sufficient to have a major impact on the environment. However, in areas where this type of use is common... like, say, shelters along the AT... where consensus has created a consistent and high frequency of useage, it is entirely plausible to see the bug population evolve resistance relatively quickly. In the past this wasn't a problem, as developing new molecules could be done fairly cost effectively. Today, all the easy ones have been used, and development of new molecules is much more difficult, time consuming, and costly. So when the current crop of parasiticides become ineffective, we may be in for a rude awakening.

For a great example, look up the recent and steadily decreasing efficacy of Frontline for treatment of fleas on dogs. As owners try to stretch the duration between applications, fleas are exposed to decreased levels of the parasiticide and some survive... and breed... resulting in more fleas with a higher tolerance for Frontline. Frontline is a great parasiticide, but it has been abused by well meaning folks that didn't understand what they were doing was creating a problem.

So, not trying to beat anyone up for using bug spray, just though y'all might find it interesting that about the worst thing that people can do with any parasiticide like this is to apply once a year and let the potency diminish markedly over time. I suspect that most people have never been told that, If reapplied frequently enough that the potency never diminishes enough that mutated/resistant parasites can survive, then this particular problem is solved. This is not really a bug spray and hammock issue as much as it is a global use of parasiticides in the environment issue.
ie. imagine the impact poor use of parasiticides has on bugs that destroy crops.
Practices like issuing military uniforms treated with Permethrin are not sustainable practices, unless they are retreated frequently.
I can only imagine the level of resistance developing among mosquitos on military installations.

BTW, per the NIH http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001040):
What side effects can this medication cause?

Permethrin may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms are severe or do not go away:
skin irritation
rash
redness
swelling

Wikipedia lists even worse side effects.

[bdbart]

Disclaimer - I am not trying to argue, just starting a discussion

Parasitologists continually lamented the impact that infrequent treatment with parasisticides has on the insect population and the continued efficacy of the parasiticides

Poor management of ANY pesticide will result in resistant populations and/or continued exposure (even at recommended dosage and frequent applications) of the same class of pesticide (same mode of action) will result in resistant populations

When first applied in adequate dose the parasiticide (Permethrin, in this case) is effective at killing the bugs. ALL of them.

Is the Permethrin "killing" the insects? I know it can, but is it? I thought that the treatment acted as a "repellent"???

On the individual level, it is easy to write this off as not applicable, as the time in a particular area, frequency of exposure, etc are unlikely to be sufficient to have a major impact on the environment. However, in areas where this type of use is common... like, say, shelters along the AT... where consensus has created a consistent and high frequency of useage, it is entirely plausible to see the bug population evolve resistance relatively quickly.

If the treatment is "killing" the insects, then yes, the above statement is applicable...If "repellent", then not (I could be wrong)

I think the biggest problem with resistance comes from when the chemical is applied directly to the environment...i.e. crop protection - where the chemical is broadcast across the field, in order to reduce populations below the economic threshold level. In this scenario, the purpose is to "kill" insects

In the past this wasn't a problem, as developing new molecules could be done fairly cost effectively. Today, all the easy ones have been used, and development of new molecules is much more difficult, time consuming, and costly. So when the current crop of parasiticides become ineffective, we may be in for a rude awakening.

The "easy" ones, some of the best pesticides are removed from the market due to environmental considerations (not b/c of resistance)...all one has to due is frequently change the chemical class in order to reduce the occurrence of resistance populations, so the efficacy of any particular chemical is not changed

The cost of developing a new chemical, stems from the EPA requirements, which is why "new" pesticides are commonly being developed from "natural" sources (as opposed to synthetic chemicals)...as the EPA requires less stringent testing on so-called "natural" derived chemicals (which is assumed to be better for the environment...and we all know what happens when we assume, IMOHO)

For a great example, look up the recent and steadily decreasing efficacy of Frontline for treatment of fleas on dogs. As owners try to stretch the duration between applications, fleas are exposed to decreased levels of the parasiticide and some survive... and breed... resulting in more fleas with a higher tolerance for Frontline. Frontline is a great parasiticide, but it has been abused by well meaning folks that didn't understand what they were doing was creating a problem.

In this scenario, Frontline is "killing" the fleas, so resistant populations are being selectively favored

Also, people need to apply at the recommended dosage (do not try to "stretch" the duration between applications) as this will increase the rate at which resistance is acquired, and not provide your pet with adequate protection

This is also true (especially, as bacteria evolve much faster) for taking antibiotics... as we all know, that if you are prescribed 2 weeks medication, then complete the medication cycle (even if you feel better after only a week)

If reapplied frequently enough that the potency never diminishes enough that mutated/resistant parasites can survive, then this particular problem is solved

You can still develop resistance from continued exposure at recommended potency/dosage/applications...just the rate at which resistance is acquired is lowered (often predicted)

Thank You rjcress for bringing this topic to the forefront of peoples minds...and it makes for a great discussion

[Cranky Bear]

I use one of PapaSmurf's UL Bug net's, mine weigh's less than 4oz and is fully enclosed (bug sock)!
I have a HH but I like the fact of not having the net over my head when it's not needed, so I usually take my GT UL Hammock or my Nano 7!

[rjcress]

So, back to the original question. I'm leaning towards liking my external miliatary bug net after testing my new UQ last night. With an integrated bug net on, I would not have been able to easily reach out and adjust the UQ, which I had to do with amazing frequency. Obviously, I need to modify how my UQ is attached so that it doesn't require frequent adjustment.

hmmm. I don't know. I just re-read the above and am not sure I'm sold on the external either due to bugs having easy access when the hammock is not occupied.
The external nets that are totally enclosed solve this problem, but they look like a real pain to get in and out of.

At this point, with my very limited experience I think I prefer the external military bug net that lets me tweak my setup easily. Once I get my hammock gear sorted out, then I expect that I'll prefer the integrated net.

I'm really intrigued with the HUG net idea, that really minimizes the netting and makes it super easy to get out in a hurry...as long as you use sufficiently thick lower body covering (TQ, sleeping bag, etc.)
http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=24029

Ease of quick exit is the one thing that worries me about the full external and full integrated nets. I want to be able to get out quick in case of fire or some other threat, if one of the kids needs me, to wee on a tree, etc.
So I guess the result of all this rambling is that I don't know what I prefer.

Disclaimer - I am not trying to argue, just starting a discussion

Poor management of ANY pesticide will result in resistant populations and/or continued exposure (even at recommended dosage and frequent applications) of the same class of pesticide (same mode of action) will result in resistant populations

Argue? You agreed with me.

Is the Permethrin "killing" the insects? I know it can, but is it? I thought that the treatment acted as a "repellent"???

Good question, and one that may make the bulk of my rant moot for this audience. I assumed that the repellent action is actually just that any mosquito that lands on the treated bug net dies due to exposure to the parasiticide. Admittedly, my "exposure" to Permethrin has been limited to applications where death of the parasite is the goal. So, I could be off base on my understanding of how it works as a repellent. Thanks for pointing this out, as I had not considered that it may work differently as a repellent.

You can still develop resistance from continued exposure at recommended potency/dosage/applications...just the rate at which resistance is acquired is lowered (often predicted)

Not when used as a parasiticide. Recommended dosage kills the parasite. Dead bugs don't reproduce, so resistance is not an issue.
If usage as a repellent does not kill, then yes, resistance will develop no matter what non-lethal does is used.

Thank You rjcress for bringing this topic to the forefront of peoples minds...and it makes for a great discussion

np