I might not hike with a map

[bobbyw]

I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?

[Jason of the Woods]

I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?

You don't need them. Just get town maps so you can find the AYCE buffets.

[Bearpaw]

You can probably get away with it. But I don't recommend it personally.

Besides the obvious "What do I do if there's an emergency?" issue, there's a decent amount of convenience and options that disappear without a map. Guidebooks usually list, at most, one road that goes into a town. In many cases, there are 2 or 3 routes that will do so, but you won't know this without a map.

Views mean less to me when I have no frame of reference for them. But when I can sit and orient my map, I know what that little town is, or what that peak is called, and often, "WOW! I just hiked over that?!" or "Man, I'm going to hike over that?!" Maps help me to feel much more a part of the world around me rather than Hansel and Gretl looking for the next breadcrumb.

I just prefer the wealth of information available for a couple of ounces that a map provides.

[Jason of the Woods]

No, buy a map or two. Atleast in the begining. You will find much of the trail to be "paved" though and really I think it would be hard to wonder off the path... This is just compared to my average hikes.

[Gray Blazer]

Bring maps. I just changed my mind after a short section hike last week. There was a trail junction and it was not marked with whiteblazes I could see, but, I saw other clues that looked like other places on the AT (Little trail signs, etc.) and doggoned if I didn't take a wrong turn. I always thought like you do that it would be easy to follow.

[Jason of the Woods]

Bring maps. I just changed my mind after a short section hike last week. There was a trail junction and it was not marked with whiteblazes I could see, but, I saw other clues that looked like other places on the AT (Little trail signs, etc.) and doggoned if I didn't take a wrong turn. I always thought like you do that it would be easy to follow.

So you had to walk an extra mile? The AT is marked atleast every half a mile with a blaze and in some places much more. As said earlier if anything it's good to have just to have an idea of where you are. After a few days on the trail for me, I just walked. Come to think of it I didn't pay the blazes much mind unless they made a good photo.

[ed bell]

If you really want to read about this subject try this thread:http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...&highlight=map
It's been my experience on this website that folks who ask if a map is necessary usually do not have very good map skills or an understanding of the value of a good map. That might not always be the case, but it is worth noting. BTW, what does "good at knowing my bearings" mean.

[superman]

I carried maps for sections of the AT but I seldom had to pull one out. The data book gave me most of what I wanted to know (resupply and water). Winter did such a good job navigating that a blind man could hike the AT.

[papa john]

It's up to you if you want to carry a map or not. The one thing that always amazed me were the sudden interest in maps whenever a map carrier pulled one out and opened it up. Like flys the non-map carriers were! Kind of comical really. The maps weren't of much use on the trail really, but if you ever have to get off the trail in an emergency and you are out in the middle of nowhere you have some idea as to the nearest road or other facilities.

[warraghiyagey]

I've never hiked with anything other than the Data Book. Maps are lots of fun. But not in the least necessary. Follow the White Blazes and enjoy your hike.

[DapperD]

I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?

I too plan to do a thru-hike , and have read many books about hiking the AT. One author states that the maps are a "must" have, rather than a need to have. I really believe this to be true. I noticed while at Culvers Gap in Stokes State Forest in N.J., (where the trail passes straight thru) it appeared as if the AT emerges from the woods right onto a busy state highway, and one has to walk a ways to pick the AT back up at this point. I could see how it would be possible to easily get lost, make a wrong turn, or worse. I think having the maps simply as a safety measure would make logical sense, I mean a thru-hike is a 14 state adventure, why skimp when it comes to ones personal safety and welfare?

[Lone Wolf]

I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?

i think you're foolish and naive

[emerald]

The name of this site, WhiteBlaze, really describes all the guidance you need ...

I hope you didn't draw that erroneous conclusion from anything I posted! Sometimes the friendly white markers aren't there to guide you when you need them most. It's much easier to lose your way and become disoriented than you may now believe.

Ever tried hiking the A.T. at night when your headlamp's batteries are fading, where there's multiple treadways and the blazing's poor? What happens when a critical blaze on a dead tree blows over in a storm, face-down, the day before you get there? Done much hiking in thick fog, above treeline in wilderness areas where there are few blazes or in fall when leaves obscure the treadway?

I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town.

How do you propose to obtain this information? I presume you intend to bounce ATC's guides from town to town as you hike from box to box and will memorize everything you'll need to know for the next section before you depart.

I've heard of photographic memories and mnemonics, but, come on, I'm not buying you're going to memorize KTA's maps for Pennsylvania or MATC's maps.

What do you think?

You're being foolish. You asked and I gave my honest opinion.

[Kirby]

I had long stretches where I did not carry maps, logistics prevented me from having them. While there were never situations where I thought "if I only had a map", I did feel uncomfortable not having them.

However, my hiking companion would tell you they are not needed and that this site cost him 200 dollars in maps.

The dynamics of hiking duos.

Kirby

[canoehead]

NOT a wise choice .
Just cuz

[Lone Wolf]

you can drive a car without insurance but....

[Tipi Walter]

If your going to be living out of a backpack for 4-6 months w/o a map, how will you know which roads to hitchhike for food, etc? Or what if you decide to do a detour 200 miles on a hitch to see a friend/family?

[emerald]

However, my hiking companion would tell you they [maps] are not needed and that this site cost him 200 dollars in maps.

Kirby

Kirby, there are times you fail to impress me when you might.

Sometimes, two hiking together are less apt to get lost than one hiking alone, provided the mapless hiker doesn't get seperated from the other who's carrying his maps for him.

Your hiking companion is incorrect about his assessment concerning the need for maps. He was fortunate. Not everyone has his good fortune although many have 20/20 hindsight.

What he should do is sell his maps to someone who may need them. See, WhiteBlaze didn't cost your friend $200.00. He did, by failing to use WhiteBlaze to help him locate someone who would like to buy his used maps at a discounted price.

[workboot]

They are kinda like guns better to have one and not need it than need one and not have it.......

[Flush2wice]

I picked up a thru-hiker who was hitching a ride into Hot Springs. He wasn't carrying maps. He hitched the wrong direction and ended up in Mars Hill where I picked him up. If he had a map he would have known which way to hitch.