If a single small tree used for building a shelter makes somebody cringe...

Then, my Lord, they must go out of their mind with rage when they see a beaver dam. Heck, a single family of beavers probably cuts down more trees each year than all the debris shelter makers in North America. Those rascals will go up and down the river chewing rings of bark and cambrium off from 300 large trees and leave them to die. And yet, somehow the forests have managed to survive the continuous onslaught of millions of beavers.

The forests around here can produce new trees at a rate faster than nature, primitive man included, can cut them down. There's gazillions of saplings struggling for the chance to get some sunlight through a break in the canopy. Sure, clearing forests for development, agriculture, lumber, etc, can destroy a forest. But taking an occassional small tree here and there amid a thriving forest has no detrimental effect whatsoever and can even be beneficial. I know... it's not the single tree it's the aggregate effect. But I still don't think the aggregate effect of all the hikers and campers in the world amounts to a fraction of the trees destroyed by other living creatures like deer and beaver.

Conservation! Not preservation.