Appalachian Pages vs. Data book or Companion

[Live the Journey]

Right after the 2009 Data book was released I was in Hot Springs and I asked the Outfitter owner if they had gotten it in yet. They hadn't, but recommended the "Appalachian Pages 2009 for North-bounders" I bought it because I hadnt heard of it, but the more I flipped through it the more I liked about it. It lists not only towns, hostels, outfitters and restaurants but also prices, local trail angels, free campsites and what seems like some really good insider info.

I've only heard people talk about the Thru hikers companion or the Data Book when they discuss which trail guide they're using, but I'm wondering if the Appalachian Pages is a reputable source that won't steer me wrong if I choose to take that one.

If anyone has heard anything or has any experience with the Appalachian Pages, please let me know!

[Lone Wolf]

Appalachian Pages is just fine. just as good as the others. go with it

[SonrisaJo]

I just got my 2009 edition in the mail and it looks awesome. I can't imagine needing any other source. Have a good hike!

[Jack Tarlin]

If you look in the "Media" section of this website, you'll see several threads where the various guidebooks are discussed, compared, reviewed.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter which one you use.

[hikingshoes]

I like the Appalachian Pages NOBO due to the maps for mail drops,places to eat, ect..
plus the ELV. profile if you turn it the right way to read it.to me the more information you have to go with is less stress having to find things in town.have a Great Hike.Charles

[Frick Frack]

We used the AP b/c in was sobo specific. Our experience was very good with it. Some of the fees/rates were incorrect but I realize there is no way of being accurate about them. It was an excellent source overall.

[SGT Rock]

They are all good. Each is tailored to a specific style of hiker and what they want. If you have a good outfitter look at all three (four if you consider just the Databook) and decide which gives you what you want.

I kind of prefer App Pages. Some thing in it I don't use (like to me those profiles are useless), but I can say that about any of them.

[Jack Tarlin]

HikingShoes:

More information for hikers does indeed lead to less stress, but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to giving information on Trail features (descriptions of shelters, campsites, water sources and alternative water sources) then the Companion and Handbook provide MUCH more information than does App. Pages.

This is also true of descriptions of Trail town facilities and businesses, where App. Pages is really deficient. Places might be cited and incuded on the town maps, but there is frequently no description of them whatsoever in the text, or very limited descriptions of the business in question. Whether it's not telling you what a particular restaurant specializes in, or more important, neglecting to include important things things like prices of motels, App. Pages is by far the LEAST informative of the three major guidebooks, so I respectfully have to disagree with your post.

[Frick Frack]

HikingShoes:

More information for hikers does indeed lead to less stress, but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to giving information on Trail features (descriptions of shelters, campsites, water sources and alternative water sources) then the Companion and Handbook provide MUCH more information than does App. Pages.

This is also true of descriptions of Trail town facilities and businesses, where App. Pages is really deficient. Places might be cited and incuded on the town maps, but there is frequently no description of them whatsoever in the text, or very limited descriptions of the business in question. Whether it's not telling you what a particular restaurant specializes in, or more important, neglecting to include important things things like prices of motels, App. Pages is by far the LEAST informative of the three major guidebooks, so I respectfully have to disagree with your post.

When we hiked into Carratunk SOBO our Appalachian Pages mentioned no services other than a Post Office. A hiker, actually two seperate hikers, we met travelling with us both had the Companion which mentioned a hostel and ice cream/snack place in Carratunk. We expected a place to stay and eat when we arrived but we we got there there was nothing, zip, zelch, zero. Our AP was more accurate in this case. All 3 of the books have discrepancies and not one of them is 100% accurate. The AP had more info than we needed and it suited us well though.

[SGT Rock]

Well my read on the AP - other books seem to want to list every nit-noid place to eat, hotel to stay in, and other stuff that I normally don't need to know in-depth. AP seemed to be closest to how I wanted it when I hike.

Example: if I am going to Daleville/Troutville I can be told there are various fast food restaurants and an AYCE. Show me some positions on the map where to find some - and let me know the cheap motels. I'm only going to be there a day, maybe too. I don't need to know about the "excellent Chineese diner" 3.0 miles one way, or the $250 bed and breakfast in the area, or the fact that there is a tractor pull ever July if I happen to be in town around then.

I figure if you are only going to spend 4 hours-24 hours in an area you don't need a detailed description of ever possible place to eat and/or stay. I want the highlights of what I need to get in order to stay on the trail and keep moving north (or south). If I need up getting hurt and spending more time sitting around waiting to heal up - chances are good I can pick up the local phone book to find out more information.

I don't plan to move to some of these trail towns and set up shop - just the facts. Seems in some cases the local editors are trying to out do convince me to buy land. The AP seems to give me the level of detail of information that I like and put it into easy to figure out blocks (lodging, food, supplies, etc.) instead of a stream of information in one large paragraph.

[Jack Tarlin]

I just looked at the 2008 Companion, Frick. It mentions Northern Outdoors as a lodging but doesn't list any hostel in Caratunk, so I'm not sure what you're talking about, unlerss, of course, the disappouinted hikers you mentioned were careless enough to be using a dated or older Guidebook......this is a good example of why folks should get the most current books available.

As to the ice cream place being closed, well this happens all the time. Businesses open and close. Town information is compiled and checked in the fall; the books are written in late fall, and appear in January. So in many cases, hikers arrive in places almost a full year after the the local town/business information was compiled. If an author or editor checks a place out in October, and if his book is published in mid-January, and the hiker doesn't get to the place in question til the following September, well that's almost a year gone by. If a small business changes its policies, prices, or closes, this is hardly the fault of the guy who collected or printed the information. This is why ALL of the guidebooks have disclaimers of some sort. Meaning I'm sorry these guys didn't get their ice cream, but sorry, this sort of thing happens more than one might think, and it's not the fault of the authors.

All books make mistakes. The 2008 App. Pages contained so many that they had to include a whole page of "corrections" when the book was shipped. (The 2009 edition seems much more on top of things).

But truth be told, Frick, the Companion has dozens of field editors that actually live in the areas they're talking about. This puts them in a great position to be on top of things, especially as regards businesses and services. In this regard (i.e. accuracy and completeness of town/service listings), the Companion is the most accurate of the three major guides, with the Handbook immediately following.

[Frick Frack]

Point taken. Admittingly I did not look at the Companion (or may have been Handbook?) of my friends, I just took their advice based on their particular guide. But truth be told, the AP was far more info than is needed to get from ME to GA. I think all reference guides are equal and invaluable. We just happened to select the AP, mostly b/c of its SOBO orientation, and it was perfect for us. I have, and will, recommend it to future hikers asking for my advice even though they could not go wrong with either of the 3.

[Jack Tarlin]

I disagree strongly with Rock.

I think that extra information is really important and really useful. If there's one restaurant in town that's particularly hiker-friendly, well I'd appreciate knowing which one it is so I can give them by business. Listing a place on a map is fine, but if all they serve is burritos, well I'd kind of like to know that before I spend ten minutes walking there. If a place offers AYCE specials, but they run out of them early, well this is info I'd want to know so I don't get there at 7:30 and discover that all the food I want is gone. In short, this seemingly insignificant information can be really useful for folks visiting towns they've never been before.


Going the extra mile by giving a one line or one sentence description of a place, i.e. what they serve, what they offer, what they charge, etc., is really important. And it's not hard to do, nor does it make for an overstuffed book....the Handbook, for example, offers a ton more descriptive information
than APP. Pages, but is only a few pages longer and is essentially the same size and weight. So a "streamlined" book isn't necessarily a good thing. For the same price, size, and weight, a hiker can be much better informed.

In closing, here's justone example, tho I could give plenty more:

In Gorham, App. Pages' text names three motels, but lists the price of only one of them. What's up with that? Why the inconsistency? Was it that hard for the editor to call or visit these places and get a price quoted? It doesn't seem to have been a problem for the other Guides. I dunno about you, Rock, but if I arrived in Gorham and stayed at a motel that was "listed" in the text of my Guidebook, only to discover the next day that my friends had all stayed a couple hundred yards away at a nicer place for twenty dollars less......well I'd be kinda pissed that my Guidebook didn't think this information was useful or important enough to tell me.

Because it is. If this happened to me, I wouldn't be thinking "I love my simplified streamlined book!"

Instead, like anyone in this situation, I'd more likely be thinking "My Guidebook just cost me twenty bucks."

Extra information isn't merely a way to "fill up" a book. Nor is this information superfluous or un-needed. Very frequently, it's information that will benefit hikers greatly in towns they visit, and the simple truth is that some of the Trail guidebooks make an effort to supply this information, and others make a deliberate decision not to.

[Lone Wolf]

it doesn't matter what y'all say. jack likes the companion. it's obvious. any questions when you come to a town, ask a local

[Jack Tarlin]

Actually, Wolf is mistaken.

Despite being a field editor for a small section of the Companion, I much prefer the Handbook, and in recent years, this is the book I've primarily used.

It isn't a question of "liking" or disliking a particular book, Wolf. I think all are worthy, and have said so. I think it doesn't matter all that much which one you ultimately use, and I've said that several times, too. But I think each book has its particular strengths and weaknesses, and I don't see anything wrong with discussing them.

[SGT Rock]

Point taken on listing a motel without rates. I think that very specific hiker friendly information such as an AYCE is a good thing to know as well. I ain't saying it is perfect - but if something isn't in there chances are I will find out anyway. And if I don't - I doubt it will ruin my hike.

Well on the other end of that the companion has some town listings that take 3 pages to list ever possible type of cuisine available (along with everything else in town). It is in a large paragraph format so if you are looking at motels you read down each one through it until you come to the one you are looking for.

On the AP, each type of service is in it's own block, and each block lists each service in a bullet format - but doesn't feel the need to tell me ever possible KFC, Taco Bell, or BK (unless it is the only, or one of a couple possibilities at that town). But gives me some info of stuff along the trail so I can get in and get out.

I'll also say this:

The first time I ever looked at the Companion the entire format was confusing and this was before they started putting trail data in the book. I took the Thru-Hikers Handbook over it because it at least made sense when looking at it - mileage data and next to it the description of what is there. Now the Companion has gotten better - the trail data is in there so you don't need the data book to go with it. But then it does this stupid thing of listing a shelter or town or point of interest, but then you have to turn ahead three or more pages to find out the details of what that is instead of just having the information in the place where it happens. The AP does something similar in some ways - but the "other" information is on the page facing the one where it is listed so all you have to do is look to the left and read what that point offers instead of jumping back and forth.

I still find the AP profile to be useless. No reference to scale to that squiggly line running down the page.

[mikec]

I've used the Companion/Data Book for the last 10 years of my section hiking. This year, I ordered the loose NOBO Appalachian Pages. It is different in the way that it is laid out, which takes some getting used to. I like the distance given for 2-3 shelters back and forward. The town maps are also very good.

As far as the Companion goes, I have always liked the year the shelters were built, as it sort of lets you know what to expect. I also like the small trivia that the Companion has had in it over the years.

For my last section hike this year, I plan to take just the sections that I need from the 2009 loose NOBO Appalachian Pages as well as xeroxed sections that I need from the 2009 Data Book and the 2008 Companion. Not alot of weight and good information from each source.

[Jack Tarlin]

By the way, off the top of my head I can think of one glaring error that some folks will want to know about:

In the text of the Hanover section, App. Pages says:

"Please do not camp anywhere North of town anywhere south of Velvet Rocks Shelter."

The implication here is that hikers should not plan on staying at established campsites in the woods just past the soccer field north of downtown, where hikers have happily camped for years.

This site is important as everyone wants to spend time in Hanover but lots of folks, especially younger ones, are on a really tight budget at this point of the trip. And folks who need to do town stuff in the morning don't want to walk almost a mile to Velvet Rocks Shelter for the night only to double-back to town the next morning.

It is true that for awhile, the Datmouth Outing Club was discouraging folks from camping here (there was a trash problem one year, and folks were pitching their tents ON the soccer field, leaving to trouble with College Security.

But tenting here was never forbidden. I've recently talked to both DOC folks and several members of the Hanover Police Department and they've confirmed to me that these campsites are fine for hikers to use in 2009, tho they want the spot kept clean, and also fairly quiet, as there are houses nearby.

But the campsites are indeed open for hikers this year, and folks using App. Pages may want to make note of this.

I should further add that both the Handbook and the Companion not only mention this site in their text and on their maps, but they also take the trouble to tell folks exactly where they should be staying, where they should NOT be tenting, that they should keep the place neat for the next folks, etc.

And this is EXACTLY the sort of additional text information that I think is useful for hikers. Some people think additional commentary like this is not needed or serves no purpose. I strongly disagree.

[SGT Rock]

Yea. but 20 years ago did you always know this sort of thing ahead of time?

And did it screw up your hike to find out you couldn't stay somewhere?

To find that there was a restaurant you hadn't planned on finding?

To know a hotel was there and not know what you would pay until you got there?

Just saying that there is no way you are ever going to know everything. To decide a guide is inferior because it doesn't have ever possible smidgen of information possible is just how you see a guide. For me having every possible smidgen of information about a place before you get there is not good either.

You deal and make do. It is a guide - not an instruction manual.

[Lone Wolf]

Yea. but 20 years ago did you always know this sort of thing ahead of time?

And did it screw up your hike to find out you couldn't stay somewhere?

To find that there was a restaurant you hadn't planned on finding?

To know a hotel was there and not know what you would pay until you got there?

Just saying that there is no way you are ever going to know everything. To decide a guide is inferior because it doesn't have ever possible smidgen of information possible is just how you see a guide. For me having every possible smidgen of information about a place before you get there is not good either.

You deal and make do. It is a guide - not an instruction manual.

no

no

no

no

20 plus years ago we had The Philosopher's guide with very basic info. when we got to a town we talked to locals about where to stay, eat, etc. hikers don't talk much to locals these days. they always seem to have their faces buried in the way-too-much-info guidebooks. todays hikers overplan and stress too much

[Jack Tarlin]

Rock is right. Years ago this detailed information was not out there, yet hikers still made it to Maine.

But he's missing the point.

If there are half a dozen comparable places to stay in a town, but one of them is significantly cheaper or nicer than the others, well I'd want to know about it. If there's a good legal campsite that'll save me two miles of unnecessary back-and-forth walking, well I'd want to know about it. And if a place is cool for camping, but staying a just a few yeards away on an adjacent field could get me fined or arrested, well I sure in hell would want to know that, too, and I'd be sort of pissed if there were folks who possessed this information, but didn't think it important enough to tell me.

Supplying this seemingly petty information can be really useful to hikers, and it has been proven that providing this material does not necesarily mean that a book becomes over-long or over-heavy as a result.

[john gault]

...And 20 years from today hikers will be carrying electronic guides that are connected and updated everyday (if needed) via a geo-synchronous satellite that tracks your every step. You'll also be able to do a teleconference with other hikers on the trail as well as family memebers...:sun

[SGT Rock]

...And 20 years from today hikers will be carrying electronic guides that are connected and updated everyday (if needed) via a geo-synchronous satellite that tracks your every step. You'll also be able to do a teleconference with other hikers on the trail as well as family memebers...:sun
Not that far off. With my smartphone I could have a copy of the Companion in PDF, get on Whiteblaze (if I had wanted to) and ask for information, use google to find out stuff that no one new the answer to, use Google maps to plot the location of servives and the best course to get there, and GPS my position to within 7', and finally - I could text message, email, or make a phone call (go figure) to the service provider to reserve a space. I figure someday a smart guidebook will have a mo' better version on-line or in digital copy compatible with Iphone, PDA, Smartphone, etc and we will be talking about who has the best up-time, fastest page loads, and the most current information as of the day, not as of the year. :-?

Paper guides will eventually be a thing of the past except for old timers that talk about the good old days when you could actually feel the paper. :banana

[Sly]

Yeah, IMO it's nice to know of your options and their whereabouts with updated info rather than aimlessly walking around.

[SGT Rock]

If there are half a dozen comparable places to stay in a town, but one of them is significantly cheaper or nicer than the others, well I'd want to know about it.
And I would too, but as you point out any guide can miss that. There could be a price war going on. My guide for the BMT is inaccurate as of 4 days ago for one guy because they gave him half off normal rates because it was winter. They never offered that to anyone else before - and now I gotta go ask them will this be normal. It just is...

If there's a good legal campsite that'll save me two miles of unnecessary back-and-forth walking, well I'd want to know about it.
And again - even if you didn't, it's only two miles. That is a drop in the hat for a thru-hiker.

And if a place is cool for camping, but staying a just a few yeards away on an adjacent field could get me fined or arrested, well I sure in hell would want to know that, too, and I'd be sort of pissed if there were folks who possessed this information, but didn't think it important enough to tell me.
And maybe even if that was the truth - there would be 30 people on WhiteBlaze telling you that though illegal, you can stay there if you do the following...


Supplying this seemingly petty information can be really useful to hikers, and it has been proven that providing this material does not necesarily mean that a book becomes over-long or over-heavy as a result.
Nor does having ever smidgen of information make their hike work, and not having this information doesn't seem to stop people from being successful.

I guess this is where it gets down to choices. I don't like the layout of the Companion and have never hiked with it and do not intend to as long as it is wacky in it's arrangement. I leave my copy here for my wife to track my hikes or whatever. I do like the lay out of the AP and though it doesn't have every smidgen of information about the trail - it has enough for me to be happy and hike - So I hike with it.

Could it be better - yes it could. I don't like the profiles, there is a lot of wasted white space, and some of the data needs tightened up (like side trail to Long Creek Falls is at 5.1 not 4.3 miles) but that doesn't change the fact it seems to work it out.

And now that I think of it. Part of the reason it is about as big as the Companion is it does have a lot of wasted white space and the font is bigger (easier to read too). But I guess that means if they find any new information to the guide, it probably will never get any bigger since it will just close up some of that space. But if you add another restaurant to a few towns in the Companion you will have to change the font even smaller, or add even more pages. As more local editors come on line for the AP, some of these things will work it out - seems some of the same people that edit for the Companion are also AP editors too. Why not offer to provide the Hanover info for AP?

And you know I love you Jack ;) Look forward to having you by the house again this year if you are inclined.

[Lone Wolf]

Yeah, IMO it's nice to know of your options and their whereabouts with updated info rather than aimlessly walking around.

cuz you're a modern day hiker. gotta have your cell and other gadgets plus info overload. gotta learn to wing it

[Awol2003]

By the way, off the top of my head I can think of one glaring error that some folks will want to know about:

In the text of the Hanover section, App. Pages says:

"Please do not camp anywhere North of town anywhere south of Velvet Rocks Shelter."



A current DOC staffer told me that they prefered that hikers not camp anywhere between town and the shelter. After you pointed out that some folks felt differently, I called DOC again, and got the same info from a second employee. Then I called ATC's Lyme office, who also confirmed that point of view.

I having nothing against a de-facto campground at that location, but choose not to publish advice that contradicts information given to me by DOC and ATC staffers. It is entirely possible that all members of these organizations are not in sync on this issue; that can hardly be categorized as an error on our part.

[Lone Wolf]

A current DOC staffer told me that they prefered that hikers not camp anywhere between town and the shelter. After you pointed out that some folks felt differently, I called DOC again, and got the same info from a second employee. Then I called ATC's Lyme office, who also confirmed that point of view.

I having nothing against a de-facto campground at that location, but choose not to publish advice that contradicts information given to me by DOC and ATC staffers. It is entirely possible that all members of these organizations are not in sync on this issue; that can hardly be categorized as an error on our part.

of course jack will have a saucy and pert answer to this :cool:

[Sly]

cuz you're a modern day hiker. gotta have your cell and other gadgets plus info overload. gotta learn to wing it

LOL... yeah right. How many times you see me on a cell phone? At the SoRuck it was like you had a new toy! :p

Having the info makes me more independent. I don't have to ask dumb questions. ;)

[Rockhound]

With the GPS technology today can someone please tell me why there are so many discrepancies from one book to the next in regards to distance and elevation?

[SGT Rock]

I don't know. Especially if the ATC gives them all the mileage data they use to make the data book.

[Rockhound]

...And 20 years from today hikers will be carrying electronic guides that are connected and updated everyday (if needed) via a geo-synchronous satellite that tracks your every step. You'll also be able to do a teleconference with other hikers on the trail as well as family memebers...:sun
Not this hiker.

[Sly]

With the GPS technology today can someone please tell me why there are so many discrepancies from one book to the next in regards to distance and elevation?

Funny, someone told me the other day all the common data that's included are identical. Do you have all the current years books or comparing the same year? I've misplaced my AP and haven't got a Companion yet :rolleyes: to compare.

[Rockhound]

May be better now. In 07' there were differences of over a mile in distances and over 500 feet in elevation in some places.

[Jack Tarlin]

AWOL:

I don't know what you mean by a "de facto campground".

We're talking about a couple of hardened, semi-permanent campsites that have been in use for many years.

And while I have no doubt about what you were told by some DOC people and even ATC people, the fact remains that other DOC folks have maintained just the opposite. DOC members, including Cabin and TRail people (who maintain this stretch) have told me they know NOTHING about discouraging folks from camping here and were never directed by DOC officials to advise folks to stay elsewhere. In fact, if there's some sort of "policy" on this, well the folks who actually work on this section have never heard of it. And there's never been signage or postings here in regards to this. If the DOC is really serious about not wanting folks camping here, well, they certainly have been kind of quiet about it.

More to the point, several Hanover Police officers have told me they know of no probition or ban on camping here, and in fact, told me they PREFER that hikers stay here, as it creates less problems for them with hikers stealthing in cemetaries, behind churces, etc. So the fact is, certain town officialdom WANTS people campinghere, and not the other way around.

Lastly, as far as certain offices not being in "sync", well it appears that at least one of these offices isn't even in sync inside its own office, as it doesn't seem to appear that the DOC has any set policy or feelings in this matter.

Which leaves us with this conclusion: The campsites near the soccer field are perfectly OK to use, and there's no reason for anyone to go out to Velvet Rocks shelter unless they really want to.

Not informing hikers about this is indeed an error. It's an error of omission, and an entirely unnecessary one.

[SGT Rock]

I don't know. Sounds like he called and confirmed the information. If a couple of people from that organization in fact asked him to put in the guide "please do not" it sounds like he respected the wishes of the people that he contacted and represented that group. He never said you cannot, or there is no place to camp. It says please do not camp there. I have a place on my section I would rather people not camp at either because it gets trashed out and there is high impact from too many people loving the section to death. Though I would rather people not do it, it is still legal and legit. But guess what I said in my guide for that section? Please camp somewhere else.

I wouldn't hold that against the AP at all. Sounds like he (AWOL) went the extra mile to ensure the information. That is, unless you think he lied about his story checking into all that?

And if you think he is telling the truth, which I assume you do. Then it isn't AWOL or the AP that is to blame if the members of that organization are not all singing the same song. I can tell you the BMTA will tell you one thing or another depending on who you talk to on a variety of subjects. Some would rather I didn't make a guide in the first place because they think that people may actually hike the trail if they know about the trail and the services along it. Sort of odd to build 300 miles of trail and not want anyone to know about it.

So in the end it isn't an error or an omission. It is doing what he thinks is right based on the information he was given. I am sure you would have done it differently, but AWOL seems to have a method for what he is doing.

[Lone Wolf]

A current DOC staffer told me that they prefered that hikers not camp anywhere between town and the shelter. After you pointed out that some folks felt differently, I called DOC again, and got the same info from a second employee. Then I called ATC's Lyme office, who also confirmed that point of view.

I having nothing against a de-facto campground at that location, but choose not to publish advice that contradicts information given to me by DOC and ATC staffers. It is entirely possible that all members of these organizations are not in sync on this issue; that can hardly be categorized as an error on our part.


of course jack will have a saucy and pert answer to this :cool:

told ya :)

[Awol2003]

With the GPS technology today can someone please tell me why there are so many discrepancies from one book to the next in regards to distance and elevation?

I know you already have your answer, but here's an even longer answer for those interested.

There are about 1500 landmarks specified in the Data Book; not all of them have elevations. I believe that the set of landmarks used by the Data Book and Companion are identical, except that The Companion adds elevations.

App Pages and THH get the data book info and use their own means of determining elevations where they are not provided. Both books also add hundreds more landmarks that are not in the data book and therefore do not have a common source.

For example: - mile 1539.8 US 20 (Lee, MA) 1400' - should be the same in all 2009 books.

If you are comparing books from different years, then all bets are off.

The core set of mileage data (those 1500 landmarks) in all three should be identical, and the elevations should be very close.

Landmarks beyond that core set will only be in App Pages and THH; they should be similar but not the same.
Great GPS technology can tell you a pretty good position for a given POINT, but there is no "true" measure of trail mileage, there is only an official approximation. The reason for this is as much philosophical as it is mathematical; in other words, it is very boring. So stop here if you don't want to be put to sleep.
+++
There is no exact measure of trail distances. A GPS will yield a different number than a measuring wheel, but neither can be said to be objectively accurate. If an ant was to hike the AT, the ant would climb up and over every obstacle. The distance it traveled would most accurately be measured with a string that would drape around every rock, resulting in a trail that is much longer than we accept it to be.

Conversely, a giant would walk a shorter path, because his strides would avoid dips and rises that we must negotiate.

On non-uniform surfaces, a measure-wheel tends to do like an ant does, and a GPS tends to act like a giant.

Even the same person will not travel the same distance twice along a section of trail. Imagine two boulders protruding a foot above the surface of the trail one yard apart. If a hiker strides from one to the other, he will have traveled 36 inches. If he steps down and back up, the distance would be 43 inches.

That's a difference of about 20 percent for a single step. When guidebooks and maps state walking distances, they are giving approximations, not facts.

[Bulldawg]

In this regard (i.e. accuracy and completeness of town/service listings), the Companion is the most accurate of the three major guides, with the Handbook immediately following.


I much prefer the Handbook, and in recent years, this is the book I've primarily used.


JT, I can't seem to get my hands around why you would want to use the book that you don't think is the best book out there? If I thought the Companion was the best book, by all means I would be using it. Same goes for the others. I just can't seem to grasp the concept of thinking the Companion is the best book out there and then using the second best book.:confused::confused:


20 plus years ago we had The Philosopher's guide with very basic info. when we got to a town we talked to locals about where to stay, eat, etc. hikers don't talk much to locals these days. they always seem to have their faces buried in the way-too-much-info guidebooks. todays hikers overplan and stress too much

I picked up some hitching hikers one time and tried to make some suggestions to them about Helen. They wanted to argue with me about their book said this and said that about Helen. I just decided to take them to town and put them out. If they didn't want my 30+ years of experience of living here, to heck with them!!

[Bulldawg]

And oh yeah, it's just walking, some thrus take it entirely too seriously! Lighten up already!

[Tin Man]

crissakes, anyone needs this much guidebook info ain't a hiker, they is tourons. i'll stick with maps only. thanks.

[max patch]

I've lived in north Georgia 30 years and I can sum up everything anyone needs to know about Helen in two words:

Don't go.

[SGT Rock]

I've lived in north Georgia 30 years and I can sum up everything anyone needs to know about Helen in two words:

Don't go.
Did you call the local maintaining club to see if that is official policy? :p

[Bulldawg]

I've lived in north Georgia 30 years and I can sum up everything anyone needs to know about Helen in two words:

Don't go.

There is certainly no reason for a hiker to go there.

[Sly]

There is certainly no reason for a hiker to go there.

I went on St Patty's Day once and had a great time. Super 8 was cheap enough.

[Heater]

Rock is right. Years ago this detailed information was not out there, yet hikers still made it to Maine.

But he's missing the point.

If there are half a dozen comparable places to stay in a town, but one of them is significantly cheaper or nicer than the others, well I'd want to know about it. If there's a good legal campsite that'll save me two miles of unnecessary back-and-forth walking, well I'd want to know about it. And if a place is cool for camping, but staying a just a few yeards away on an adjacent field could get me fined or arrested, well I sure in hell would want to know that, too, and I'd be sort of pissed if there were folks who possessed this information, but didn't think it important enough to tell me.

Supplying this seemingly petty information can be really useful to hikers, and it has been proven that providing this material does not necesarily mean that a book becomes over-long or over-heavy as a result.

Just wonderin'. How thick do you think a guidebook would be that describes all this for every town as you do with Hanover? Would it require several volumes? :-?

;)

[hikingshoes]

JT,Im not into all this Drama/BS that your posting,i just said i like the AP better than the AT data book.Sounds like to me if you dont like the books that are out there how about you write a book,and leave all the drama out of it.thank you and have a great Hike.charles

[Lone Wolf]

There is certainly no reason for a hiker to go there.

your opinion. i could say the same about kincora, rustys or other places. helen has more to offer

[Jaybird]

Right after the 2009 Data book was released I was in Hot Springs and I asked the Outfitter owner if they had gotten it in yet. They hadn't, but recommended the "Appalachian Pages 2009 for North-bounders" ............ETCETCETC............................. ............................
If anyone has heard anything or has any experience with the Appalachian Pages, please let me know!



I bought Appalachian PAGES when it first came out LAST year...
used it for my 2 week section...good stuff....then LOST it....
guess i have to order a 2009 Version!:D
hehehehehehehe

Hope to see some of you WHITEBLAZE.netters out there in May as I (along with "Jigsaw", "Model-T", & "DAKS") head NOBO from Harpers Ferry to Swatara Gap,PA

[TJ aka Teej]

When we hiked into Carratunk SOBO our Appalachian Pages mentioned no services other than a Post Office. A hiker, actually two seperate hikers, we met travelling with us both had the Companion which mentioned a hostel and ice cream/snack place in Carratunk. We expected a place to stay and eat when we arrived but we we got there there was nothing, zip, zelch, zero. Our AP was more accurate in this case.

The 2008 Companion did not list a hostel in Caratunk. We did list Northern Outdoors, just 2 miles north of Caratunk, which continues to provide well reviewed lodging and food services to hikers. Yes, we did list the Moose Crossing Takeout, which was in operation only a few weekends last summer. Due to the irregular hours, and not being unable to contact the owner, Moose Crossings is no longer listed.
For 2009 we expanded our listing for Jackman, an easier hitch from Northern Outdoors and which suits hiker's needs much more than Bingham.

[Frick Frack]

The 2008 Companion did not list a hostel in Caratunk. We did list Northern Outdoors, just 2 miles north of Caratunk, which continues to provide well reviewed lodging and food services to hikers. Yes, we did list the Moose Crossing Takeout, which was in operation only a few weekends last summer. Due to the irregular hours, and not being unable to contact the owner, Moose Crossings is no longer listed.
For 2009 we expanded our listing for Jackman, an easier hitch from Northern Outdoors and which suits hiker's needs much more than Bingham.

Thanks, I was already corrected by your biggest fan. We carried the Appalachian Pages & I was referring to information received from fellow hikers carrying a different guide (most likely not yours of course). I have used the Companion for years on our section hikes but used the AP on our thru because it was SOBO specific. I think both are great guides but comments made towards the AP were a little, maybe alot, too dramatic. Personally the AP is easier for me to read but to each his/her own.... I will continue to patronize both as either are invaluable.

If "Moose Crossings" is the ice cream/snack shack a few tenths (.3?) off of the trail, the Ranger (who kindly let us camp behind the headquarters) said it had been closed for at least three years. Anyhow, none of this really matters though because no one guide could be 100% accurate as things change constantly. Thanks for a great guide. And AWOL....thank you for a great guide.

[Skyline]

I chose Helen over Hiawassee when I took an unplanned overnight due to a friend I'd hiked with from Springer needing to leave the Trail. Did not regret it. It was pre-season so the Helendorf Inn was offering a very decent room for bargain basement rates (a couple days later price would have shot way up). Great places to eat, too. We chose a restaurant overlooking a river and ate steak—not that expensive either!

Hiawassee has a lot going for it, too. But prior to tourist season in Helen, I like Helen better.

[Jack Tarlin]

Hiking Shoes: The purpose of this thread is to discuss and compare the different books that are out there. Sorry all you see here is "drama". If you're not interested in hearing fair, forthright reviews of the current Trail guides, then you don't have to read them.

Bulldawg: While I think the Companion contains a real wealth of information that's useful to hikers, both on the Trail (shelter descriptions, water sources, etc.) and has very good town information, I prefer the Handbook for any number of reasons: It's better designed, is easier on the eye, and has better maps.

But the two are really quite similar, and I've said several times here and elsewhere, it really doesn't matter that much which book one ends up using.
In fact, this last statement pretty much applies to all three of the standard guides.

[TJ aka Teej]

Got my Companion a while back, and just purchased the '09 Pages. Still hoping for an '09 Philosopher's Guide...