PDA

View Full Version : Feeling Ornery



nsherry61
06-01-2018, 17:57
As context, I've been struggling with very slow healing posterior tibial tendonitis in my right ankle since January, so I haven't been able to get outside and hike or backpack, and most of my late winter, spring, and summer plans are in the toilet. So, for what it's worth . . .


I really don't like the vague, ambiguous and somehow ego-connected concept of thru-hiker or thru-hike or, for that matter section-hiker or section-hike. The concepts ultimately seem pretty meaningless to me.

Why do we use these almost meaningless terms as if they provide helpful insights into what we have done or how we identify ourselves?

Thru-hiking the JMT is also section hiking the PCT (almost). Does it really matter that I hike a named trail end to end instead of some other planned hike of similar length and/or terrain? I DON'T THINK SO.

Is a loop hike of a loop trail a thru-hike? What if I hike on two different named trails to make the loop?

Is hiking 100 miles of a single named trail (i.e. a section hike) somehow different than hiking two or three trails or sections of trails that add up to 100 miles (not really a section hike)? I don't think so.

I suggest that saying you are thru-hiking some particular trail is useful and meaningful. But how does a more generic, "I'm doing a thru-hike or I'm a thru-hiker have any relevance at all to meaningful communication other than suggesting you either have a stick up your butt about your accomplishments or you are kind of a newby that wants to be identified as part of some meaningless in-crowd that you haven't figured out is meaningless yet?

I can see section hiking some big named trail as meaningful (i.e. doing it in parts over the years). But going out and doing a section hike of the xyz trail doesn't have any real meaning. Going out and doing a 100 mile section of xyz does have meaning.

How about being a thru-hiker? Who gives a rip if you can hike some random named trail end to end instead of some other fantastic backpacking trip along a whole mix of great trails.

Maybe identifying as being a section-hiker or a thru-hiker really just means that you are a backpacker without the imagination or creativity to put together a great backpacking trip beyond just following some single, famously named trail from end to end.

Puddlefish
06-01-2018, 18:41
For me, it's about what makes me happy. I'm happy day hiking, which in turn allowed me to get into good enough shape to make a thru hike attempt... which was an awesome day to day experience, other than getting hurt, which means it wasn't a thru hike, but a section hike, which didn't diminish that day to day enjoyment, even though the title changed, the experience remained the same.

Then again, I'm not super competitive and goal driven at this time in my life. All this works for me, and I'd never suggest there's a better way of hiking for anyone else. It is fairly pointless when people disparage others' hikes.

If someone tells me they thru hiked and had a blast everyday, I'll find that awesome and inspiring. If they tell me, they struggled through the pain and hardship and unhappiness to complete their thru hike, I'll politely excuse myself from the conversation while secretly thinking they're an idiot. But, in the end, they aren't hiking for me, so whatever floats their boat.

martinb
06-01-2018, 18:55
Bummer that you are town-bound. These things tend to make the regular backpacker slightly grumpy.

The bottom line, for me anyway, about these labels (section, thru, whatever) is the conquest. Whether it's making it through a tough, short trail for an overnighter or summiting Everest, the Id is in control. The personality type for these sorts of adventures matters. Recently, there was a thread about the wilderness experience on the AT. It seems as though the wilderness experience is secondary to the conquest of finishing the trail. The AT, though, is about immersing yourself in the wilderness experience, not completing the trail is the fastest manner possible (I know most do not do this but it has been done).

This is part of the reason I don't spend much time on the AT. I do use it on loops and such but, for me, the whole point of backpacking is about being in mother nature and going as I please. I could never condition my mind to hike X number of miles per day in order to further some ultimate conquest.

nsherry61
06-01-2018, 19:07
But to address the OP, may I suggest a rewrite that "day hiking . . . allowed me to get into good enough shape to . . . attempt a long distance backpacking trip ... which was an awesome day to day experience, other than getting hurt, which means I had to shorten my hike".

What is the benefit of using the thru-hike and/or section-hike labels? They add a level of confusion and no added clarity. They distract from the fact that you went backpacking and your long hike was shorted by some amount due to injury. Who cares if it was some unspecified end-to-end hike on a single famous trail or some other route?

Feral Bill
06-01-2018, 19:59
The title "Thru Hiker" is a trophy, for those who care about those things. Of course doing a thru hiking gives a form of sorts to a long walking vacation, which is not a bad thing. I might even do so one day, or not.

Slo-go'en
06-01-2018, 20:20
When people ask me if I'm thru hiking, I answer "not yet". That typically gets a chuckle.

MuddyWaters
06-01-2018, 20:29
A thru hike has to be reasonably long, such as to be difficult to hike in one go. I personally scoff at the idea of "thru hiking" anything less than about 500 miles. Its just hiking. It's an arbitrary distance,
But without a doubt a two-day 50-mile hike does not count as a thru-hike, except to a fool.

All the Facebook people want the cache of calling themselves thru-hikers for some reason.

Tipi Walter
06-01-2018, 21:58
To me, "Backpacker" is top of the heap---all other designations like thruhiker or section hiker or whatever falls below this title.

"Lifetime Backpacker" is even better, as often many purported top-rung "thruhikers" stop backpacking after their long trail goal is reached.

And Whiteblaze lists at least 21 trails other than the AT on their forum so in my opinion "backpacking" is the dominant keyword, not "thruhiking".

KCNC
06-01-2018, 22:15
To me, "Backpacker" is top of the heap---all other designations like thruhiker or section hiker or whatever falls below this title.

"Lifetime Backpacker" is even better, as often many purported top-rung "thruhikers" stop backpacking after their long trail goal is reached.

And Whiteblaze lists at least 21 trails other than the AT on their forum so in my opinion "backpacking" is the dominant keyword, not "thruhiking".

^^^^^This

My son is on the AT - Pearisburg at the moment, started at Springer, headed to Katahdin. When friends and family ask what he's doing I tell them "He's hiking the AT" which almost always triggers the follow-up question "The whole thing?" - to which I reply "That's his intent."

No use of "thru" or "section" anywhere in the conversation, and I've communicated exactly what he's doing.

I'll complete the AT, but not all at once. Outside demands just don't make it realistic to put everything on hold for 4-6 months.

But I can do 2-3 weeks on a fairly regular basis, and that gives me the freedom to avoid large crowds, which is more enjoyable for me.

Slow Trek
06-02-2018, 00:01
My son and I walked from Springer to Harper's Ferry in 2016. We knew my job would not allow time to go any farther. In seven days we are heading back to Harper's Ferry to continue North. We have 30 days,because he did what kids do,grew up and got a job. I am happy he can get a month off. I don't really know if circumstances will allow us to see the top of Mt K together,but I sure as hell will try. We will obviously not get there this year. Are we failed through hikers? Section Hikers? Long Ass Section Hikers? Simply stupid,like most of my friends think? I don't know,and I don't care. What I know is this-some of the best days of my life have been spent on the AT,and I would not trade that time with my son for anything. I will leave it to someone else to find the proper terminology,because I hike for the joy. And the heat,sweat,spiderwebs and rain.... See you out there.

perrymk
06-02-2018, 05:28
I think the labels are useful when used in the right crowd. When I told people who were members of the Florida Trail Association that I was section hiking, actually section day hiking, the Florida Trail, they understood what I meant. Even non-hikers grasped fairly quickly that I was hiking a particular trail in sections that could be completed in a day.

One person's lack of imagination is another person's personal goal. It probably doesn't matter to the world in the grand scheme of things but if it brings one person some happiness, then it matters enough.

It's also OK to vent a little, especially when you can't fully participate in an activity I'm guessing you enjoy, labels and all.

nsherry61
06-02-2018, 08:49
. . . In seven days we are heading back to Harper's Ferry to continue North. We have 30 days,because he did what kids do,grew up and got a job. . .
That's awesome! And, congratulations of making time and kids to do that with!

I was planning on hiking the Sierras from Kennedy Meadows to Tahoe with my son and his girlfriend as they hike the PCT. But alas, other family obligations are limiting my time and my ankle is limiting my backpacking, so hopefully I'll be well enough to hike for a day with them in Oregon when they arrive (assuming they get their). What a great adventure.

nsherry61
06-02-2018, 09:00
. . . I was section hiking, actually section day hiking, the Florida Trail, they understood what I meant.
Exactly. Perfect use of the term.


It's also OK to vent a little, especially when you can't fully participate in an activity I'm guessing you enjoy, labels and all.
Live for might be a bit more on point, sadly. To be honest, what I was/am really trying to do with this thread was stir up a heated and entertaining debate about something that annoys me, but really doesn't matter. . . kinda like starting a thread by saying that country music sucks.

Dogwood
06-02-2018, 19:06
Any hiker can be egotistical..."with a stick up their butt." Thru hikers have no monopoly on being egotists. I've seen quite a few AT day hikers, weekend warriors, and LASHers with the issue as well...including younger folks like Scouts. I've seen it in cyber hikers. IMHO the egotistical thru hiker is most often associated with thru hiking the AT, new LD hike attempters and doers...as said those wanting a label, to be part of a crowd, to be recognized or validated. I don't see it as much from long time LD backpackers. It's changing a bit though as more hikers make the PCT their first, and sometimes only, LD hike.

rocketsocks
06-02-2018, 20:09
One dosent have have to backpack the PCT, CDT, AT, FT, CT...etc; to be a back packer, start with dispelling that arguement and then you might be on ya something, otherwise, who really gives a crap but internet chuckleheads.

evyck da fleet
06-02-2018, 20:49
^^^^^This

When friends and family ask what he's doing I tell them "He's hiking the AT" which almost always triggers the follow-up question "The whole thing?" - to which I reply "That's his intent."


This is how I reply. When inserting thru hiker it makes it sound like an accomplishment as opposed to a hike. If I want to hear about your experiences hiking I’ll ask where you’ve hiked and what trails. I can get the info I want whether the trail was completed all at once or in sections. I’m less likely to ask for more detail if the hiking list is presented as a list of conquered trails.

BillyGr
06-02-2018, 21:00
A thru hike has to be reasonably long, such as to be difficult to hike in one go. I personally scoff at the idea of "thru hiking" anything less than about 500 miles. Its just hiking. It's an arbitrary distance,
But without a doubt a two-day 50-mile hike does not count as a thru-hike, except to a fool.

All the Facebook people want the cache of calling themselves thru-hikers for some reason.

It depends on what one is classifying as a Thru Hike.

For a simple example, if one did that 50 miles (actually just a little bit more) by starting on the AT in NY and ending in MA, one could say that they Thru-Hiked the AT in CT (which they did - completed the length of the trail in the state in one trip).

Not the same as what you usually think of when saying Thru Hike, but as long as the qualification (the length in CT part) is there, it's still true.

MuddyWaters
06-02-2018, 21:37
It depends on what one is classifying as a Thru Hike.

For a simple example, if one did that 50 miles (actually just a little bit more) by starting on the AT in NY and ending in MA, one could say that they Thru-Hiked the AT in CT (which they did - completed the length of the trail in the state in one trip).

Not the same as what you usually think of when saying Thru Hike, but as long as the qualification (the length in CT part) is there, it's still true.
Absolutely not. Unless you want to be snickered at.

A thru hike at minimum is a complete hike of an established lengthy trail or route, in a single effort. Or unestablished if its a route you pioner and anyone wants to recognize.

It is not ever applied to some arbitrary "part" of a trail.

What you refer to is simply called "hiking"

People that use the term for other things, are ignorant, or desperately want to come claim they have done something significant by word association, when they havent.

If AT in CT was congruent with the named " Whaasup" trail for the length, one might say they thru hiked the whassup trail, but you don't go inventing trails by declaring arbitrary endpoints.

It also implies some amount of length, time, and difficulty.

Dogwood
06-02-2018, 22:22
Naming trails and hikes with acronyms is where the ego problem tends to promulgate. As they get more and more recognized, ala WB and WB Users adding to the AT frenzy, "the AT is the king of trails", folks wish to attach themselves in greater degrees to hiking these enormously popularized trails. Making hiking them "easier" through making them more familiar and predictable adds to the melee. It can result in these trails being loved to death and being put upon a pedestal. Hence, what follows is putting those who hike "the" trail, potentially anyone, upon a pedestal.


No one gave a rat's arse about a hike in the Pinelands Preserve until it became the "official" Back To Nature(Batona) Tr with infrastructure - maps, trail description, logistical info, signage, blazes, guidebook accounts, and generation of folk's online inquiries and opinions reaching critical mass.


The thread topic makes for good WB cyber play without coming to any concrete factual conclusion. It's an endless loop debate. Heck, some of the longest and most heated threads on this site are ones that attempt to define "thru-hiker. " Confrontations and intellectual dishonesty arise even with the ATC's 2000 Miler definition, which this thread will morp, specifically the ATC's qualifying sentence "we do expect that persons applying for inclusion in our 2,000-miler records have made an honest effort to walk the entire Trail."


I understand though Nsherry. I hope you get well soon. Godspeed. Make a commitment to healing and getting outside away from the Interwad. Getting in the water doing rehab and low impact might brighten your spirits.

MuddyWaters
06-02-2018, 22:52
Along those lines

Someone recently prefaced an ad for items for sale by saying that they were a "1000 miler". Note that this had absolutely nothing to do with the items for sale.

First thing that comes to mind is "thats not a thing"

More of the same

People desperately want to claim that they too must be
*something* by association. Life's just not fair if they don't get recognized also for their personal accomplishment

Odd Man Out
06-02-2018, 23:09
I did a thru hike of Main Street in Hanover NH!

I have not had the opportunity yet to do a long distance hike, but hope to. For me, the difference would be hiking long enough to become physically conditioned as you don't get when hiking a few days. But mostly, I would want to hike long enough so that schedules become irrelevant with no designated end date or destination. I would the be a through-hiker as I would just hike until I'm through.

johnnybgood
06-02-2018, 23:11
The common denominator in all this hyperbolical Id designation is the oft overlooked fact that everyone is outdoors, greeting nature with a firm handshake. Our walk may be for only one day , or it could be 300 days , no matter... its still a journeymans sojourn in the woods for whatever time he is given.

egilbe
06-03-2018, 07:21
I did trail maintenance this week. And I backpacked. We met our first nobo on top of East Bald Pate on our way back yesterday. So I section hiked the AT (that section for probably the 20th time) and section hiked the GNLT.

Did I check all the boxes?

nsherry61
06-03-2018, 11:50
. . . but you don't go inventing trails by declaring arbitrary endpoints. . .
Don't we? Aren't both endpoints of the AT somewhat arbitrary? Heck, it used to start in a different place. It may end at a different place in the future. The trail is not the same trail this year as it was last year. The International AT goes beyond Baxter. So shouldn't people that hike the AT actually be calling themselves section hikers of the IAT?

I suggest that other that being useful descriptions of how one is hiking a particular trail, like "I am thru-hiking the AT", or I am section-hiking the AT, the concept of doing a thru-hike or being a thru-hiker are kinda dumb and not very useful.

How is hiking 2200 miles of "the AT" any more of a noteworthy or name-worthy accomplishment than hiking 2000 miles of the AT and 200 miles of some other connector trails at either end that are the not "official AT"?

Why is thru-hiking a thing? How is thru-hiking, as a thing, of any consequence? "Yeah, I thru-hiked xyz trail". So, who cares? What does that mean that is relevant? I'd love to hear about your backpacking trip along the xyz trail. How far did you go? What did you see? What was the terrain like? Did you have fun? I don't give a rat's a$$ about whether or not you hiked the exact xyz trail instead of some section of the xyz trail and the qrs trail and some other unnamed branch of the abc trail.

I would like to suggest that if the terms thru-hike or thru-hiker are being used to provide a sense of accomplishment, the user is rather missguided into thinking that accomplishment is tied to hiking from one arbitrary endpoint of one over-publicised and over-used trail to the other arbitrary endpoint of the same trail. Isn't the accomplishment really more appropriately tied to the dedicated time and adventure along a trail or through a trail system regardless of how well publicised a specific route is.

It seems to me that the ATC's 2000 miler recognition is an example of highlighting the real accomplishment of a long hike along a particular corridor instead of muddying the recognition by the use of specific arbitrarily identified endpoints.

nsherry61
06-03-2018, 12:20
You know what else really bugs me about this whole concept of thru-hiking and section hiking? It focuses a disproportionate amount of backpacking attention on these few, well publicised, and overused trails instead of focusing the community's attention on all the other fantastic and beautiful trails that are all around us, but not widely recognised single-trail routes. The concept of thu-hiking, as an accomplishment, seems to me to also imply that backpacking a similar distance with similar commitment through a trail network or connected networks that are not identified by a single named trail is somehow not as much of an accomplishment - personally, I think it's significantly more of an accomplishment, it takes more skill and planning.

Maybe we could come up with some more meaningful terms that are defined and provide a strong sense of accomplishment and identification.
Some possibilities:
- long distance backpacker or long distance backpacking trip (anything > 100 miles)?
- ultra long distance backpacker or ultra long distance backpacking trip (anything > 1000)?

. . . simple somewhat intuitive and annoyingly arbitrary terms to help us in our communication.

I don't know. I think some terms that provide a sense of accomplishment can be great, but tying them to the concept of a single identified trail with particular, often arbitrary, end points seem shallow and narrow.

For example: "I want to do an ultra long distance hike, maybe thru-hiking the AT, because I want to be an ultra-long distance hiker" makes sense. That way the focus is on the backpacking and the idea of a thru-hike is simply a useful descriptor of one way of doing that backpacking. In contrast: "I want to do a thru-hike, maybe thru-hike the AT, because I want to be a thru-hiker" seems really limited, and narrow minded and missing the point of focusing on that huge commitment to a great outdoor adventure that might entail one long trail, 50 bits of trails, or no trail at all.

Dogwood
06-03-2018, 13:10
The International AT goes beyond Baxter. So shouldn't people that hike the AT actually be calling themselves section hikers of the IAT?


I've thought the same thing.


People see a thru hike being a completion of something most are able to grasp as typically above avg in difficulty and enduring. It's associated with a superlative. That is, they know the distance and time and challenges are great, most often greater, than a day or section hike. Society tends to rewards people for this through some level of recognition. People who summit Mt Everest receive greater overall recognition than those that decide to stop at Base Camp. Can you immediately name any of the highest pts in Rhode Island, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, or Florida? Bet you cant. Can you name the highest peak in N. America, California, or Alaska? Probably.

Decibel
06-03-2018, 13:57
Jerimoth Hill

nsherry61
06-03-2018, 14:25
People see a thru hike being a completion of something most are able to grasp as typically above avg in difficulty and enduring. It's associated with a superlative. That is, they know the distance and time and challenges are great, most often greater, than a day or section hike.

So we are equating a thru-hike of the AT with a thru-hike of the Long Trail? Not really the same or even close to equivalents. The term fails to differentiate these differences. And, if we hike the AT from Springer to the Long Trail and then hike to then end of the Long Trail instead of to Baxter, somehow our accomplishment is less because we didn't thru-hike the AT? I don't think so. We are holding a thru-hike up as a great accomplishment (which most all of them are, I would suggest), but really, most thru-hikes are pretty much a series of 3 to 5 day hikes all strung together. Nothing remotely as challenging as an expedition through the Alaskan bush with few if any trails and resupply every few weeks.


People who summit Mt Everest receive greater overall recognition than those that decide to stop at Base Camp.

False equivalence! A thru-hike is not a particular pinnacle of achievement that is greater or higher than non-thru-hikes. Many non thru-hikes are longer and harder than many thru-hikes.


Can you immediately name any of the highest pts in Rhode Island, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, or Florida? Bet you cant. Can you name the highest peak in N. America, California, or Alaska? Probably.


Jerimoth Hill, Hawkeye Point, Driskill Mountain, Woodall Mountain, Panorama Point, Britton Hill . . . Denali, Mt. Whitney, Denali.
Okay, I admit, google helped with the first part of the list. But, what is the tallest mountain in the US instead of the highest? Which is the tallest in N. America?

Yeah, we like to relish in the highest, longest, hottest, coldest, etc. But, I don't see how that is relevant to the concept of thru-hikes. They are not the longest, highest, roughest, toughest or best looking. They are just some of the most well publicised.

Malto
06-03-2018, 15:10
Naming trails and hikes with acronyms is where the ego problem tends to promulgate. As they get more and more recognized, ala WB and WB Users adding to the AT frenzy, "the AT is the king of trails", folks wish to attach themselves in greater degrees to hiking these enormously popularized trails. Making hiking them "easier" through making them more familiar and predictable adds to the melee. It can result in these trails being loved to death and being put upon a pedestal. Hence, what follows is putting those who hike "the" trail, potentially anyone, upon a pedestal.
I have to snicker at all of the angst that occurs over getting a JMT permit. You can put together a much better 212 mile stroll in the Sierra, with all the cool sections of the JMT but without the JMT permit hassle. But people are so set on hiking every step of that three letter trail. This photo is NOT on the JMT, it must not be nice. Extra credit if you know where this is.
42819

perrymk
06-03-2018, 16:32
[QUOTE=nsherry61;2210583
How is hiking 2200 miles of "the AT" any more of a noteworthy or name-worthy accomplishment than hiking 2000 miles of the AT and 200 miles of some other connector trails at either end that are the not "official AT"?
[/QUOTE]
Probably the same reason taking 100 college credits towards one major and 20 towards another isn’t the same as 120 all in one major. 100/20 typically doesn’t get a degree; 120 can get a degree. It’s the sense of completion and accomplishment. Some people care about these things, some don’t.

nsherry61
06-03-2018, 19:02
Probably the same reason taking 100 college credits towards one major and 20 towards another isn’t the same as 120 all in one major. 100/20 typically doesn’t get a degree; 120 can get a degree. It’s the sense of completion and accomplishment. Some people care about these things, some don’t.
Another false equivalency. Doing 80% of a task and 20% of another, completing neither, is NOT the same as completing something equally rewarding and meaningful that involves a little independent thought. In the above example, it would be better to compare completing a generic degree from a big public university vs. completing a customized degree from a small elite private school. Personally, I would rather complete a custom degree program from Harvey Mudd College than standardized degree from Oregon State University. It is the persistent and elevated worshiping of that generic degree in ignorance of all the other fantastic opportunities that I am railing against here. I want to read about backpacking and it's immense multi-faceted, multi-dimensional possibilities and experiences and not just focus on the relative monochrome, one-dimensional single aspect of it, hiking long distance trails from one end to the other.

perrymk
06-03-2018, 19:34
It is not a false equivalency. Your orneriness is causing wrongness.

Not completing a trail is compared to not completing a degree. Both cases involved doing something similar, that is, another trail/subject. While switching topics or trails may be rewarding, many will not feel the same sense of completion.

nsherry61
06-03-2018, 20:08
It is not a false equivalency. Your orneriness is causing wrongness. . .
Oh, I think it is and I think I argued my point pointedly.

. . . Both cases involved doing something similar, that is, another trail/subject. While switching topics or trails may be rewarding, many will not feel the same sense of completion.
That, I cannot argue with. And, I fully support people making goals for themselves that make them feel good and then pursuing them. I just think that the goal of "a thru-hike" is a pretty poorly defined and almost meaningless goal whereas a goal of a "long-distance backpacking trip" provides a lot more interesting options and potential or a goal of thru-hiking a specific trail has actual specific meaning.

So yeah, we are now on page two of a petty semantic argument. That being said, at heart, I think the discussion has merit for encouraging people to think of great backpacking adventure far beyond the limitations of "a thru-hike".

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 01:16
Yeah, we like to relish in the highest, longest, hottest, coldest, etc. But, I don't see how that is relevant to the concept of thru-hikes.


Totally relevant as we're apt to compare coming to judgments about what's being compared...based on all sorts of criteria. Characteristics of a hike set it apart. As Perrmk said, it's also the accomplishment of completing something. The perception is that thru-hikes are more difficult or worthy of greater recognition than day or weekend hikes or section hikes unless something extraordinary - dramatic - has happened. Distance, length of duration, number of challenges, how fast - FKT's, blind hikers, those with heart transplants or pacemakers, very young or old, youngest/oldest the first woman, solo LD female hikers, the first ever person to thru the AT, the first to do a TC, the first to come up with and complete non stop a Great Western Loop, if a hiker had a near death survival experience, if the hike involved dangerous wildlife encounters, etc play into those judgments. Don't tell us you haven't found greater interest in those hikes with those characteristics! I'm not passing judgment if these perceptions are wrong or right. It just seems that way. If you disagree that's OK too.


Beyond that does it really matter to others what I believe about this? It's just cyber fodder, a waste of time.


Don't know the first woman to hike all of GA, third person ever to thru-hike the AT, or fourth fastest AT FKT do you...without Googling? Bet it would take some searching to find the first woman who completed GA IF even a category was recorded. WHY? HOW ABOUT THIS? Does anyone here know the name of the first person who did an AT completion done in section hikes? I bet not! What does that say about society and yourself...in how we make comparisons and judgments?

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 01:20
i have to snicker at all of the angst that occurs over getting a jmt permit. You can put together a much better 212 mile stroll in the sierra, with all the cool sections of the jmt but without the jmt permit hassle. But people are so set on hiking every step of that three letter trail. This photo is not on the jmt, it must not be nice. Extra credit if you know where this is.
42819

shr,,,,,,,,,

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 01:26
PM me with that overlay map of the SHR, JMT, PCT, and, if you can, Skurka's SEKI High Route and High Sierra Tr you posted before. I want to save it. Good stuff. I'll add some other stuff like the L2HR.

LittleRock
06-04-2018, 08:00
it's just walkin'

Tipi Walter
06-04-2018, 10:13
The common denominator in all this hyperbolical Id designation is the oft overlooked fact that everyone is outdoors, greeting nature with a firm handshake. Our walk may be for only one day , or it could be 300 days , no matter... its still a journeymans sojourn in the woods for whatever time he is given.

Amen, brother. Pass me the gorp and topo map.

I could care less what trail a backpacker is hiking or whether he/she's on a thruhike or a section hike or an overnighter or living as a bum outside Damascus.

The bottom line categorization of and for these people is BAG NIGHTS---and how many they have.

BAG NIGHTS

What are bag nights? Sleeping outdoors at all costs. The highest rung in my opinion are Backpacker Bag Nights---versus car camping bag nights or sleeping in the backyard bag nights or hobo squatting at an AT shelter bag nights. Backpacker bag nights means the person sleeps out every night and hikes every day.

The philosophical corollary to this is thusly---"If you're outdoors you're a Success; If you're indoors you're a Failure." A little mantra for folks to live by. Came up with it all by myself.

Dogwood brings up the point of Ego in regards to hiking and backpacking. It's the perennial affliction of all humans---Ego. The "backpacker's Ego" is that strange need to sell our brand---our name and trip reports---to achieve some sort of vaunted reputation. I know I do it with my trail journals and trip reports. If we do it long enough we become known as a Backpacker---in different categories---Thruhiker, section hiker etc.

The most obvious proof of this is some guy pulling a completed thruhike of the AT and then writing a book about the experience, i.e. selling his brand. A similar thing are AT thruhikers "holding court" at shelter picnic tables---they've been on the trail for 3 months and think they know everything and will now take your questions---never asking a single question of their own. But this subject requires a separate thread.

nsherry61
06-04-2018, 11:56
I have to snicker at all of the angst that occurs over getting a JMT permit. You can put together a much better 212 mile stroll in the Sierra, with all the cool sections of the JMT but without the JMT permit hassle. But people are so set on hiking every step of that three letter trail. This photo is NOT on the JMT, it must not be nice. Extra credit if you know where this is.
42819
I think this sums up the the point of this thread to me better than anything else.

nsherry61
06-04-2018, 13:13
. . . Totally relevant as we're apt to compare coming to judgments about what's being compared...based on all sorts of criteria. Characteristics of a hike set it apart. . .
And I disagree that the term and concept of a thru-hike is relevant or even useful in regards to great accomplishments because the term has no connection to how long or hard or fast or beautiful a hike was. It is only relevant as a descriptor about hiking a single trail end to end, which, in itself is NOT a great accomplishment. It only becomes a particular accomplishment in the context of the specific trail that was hiked end to end. So, quit thinking of one's self as a thru-hiker or planning a thru-hike, instead think of one's self as a backpacker and plan to hike the trail or trails of your choice, for which you might suggest that hiking the AT would be a great accomplishment and your goal will be to thru-hike it.

On a similar note, I would suggest that anyone that describes themselves as a thru-hiker must not be a very accomplished backpacker because they have limited their backpacking experience to thru-hiking, a very small part of backpacking overall. Heck, almost by definition a thru-hiker is someone that just hikes on well marked trails which in itself is super limiting and suggests a pretty significant lack or skill or ambition.



. . . As Perrmk said, it's also the accomplishment of completing something. The perception is that thru-hikes are more difficult or worthy of greater recognition. . .
And THAT is what I am calling BS on!!!

The rest of your comment suggested we hold thru-hikes in high regard relative to day hikes or weekend hikes, but again, that is not really the relevant comparison. Many in this community (yourself included, I gather from your writing) hold thru-hikes up as a great accomplishment on their own right relative to other backpacking. I don't believe that to be an insightful or useful assumption. My walk to the corner store is a great accomplishment compared to getting out of bed and walking to my chair in the living room, but, that does not make my walk to the corner store a great accomplishment in the context of walking in general. AND, I don't brag about and identify myself as a corner store walker as if, in itself, it is a great thing.



. . . Don't know the first woman to hike all of GA, third person ever to thru-hike the AT, or fourth fastest AT FKT do you...without Googling? Bet it would take some searching to find the first woman who completed GA IF even a category was recorded. WHY? HOW ABOUT THIS? Does anyone here know the name of the first person who did an AT completion done in section hikes? I bet not! What does that say about society and yourself...in how we make comparisons and judgments?

It suggests we tout winners as defined by media and hype. I see the term thru-hiker as just that, hype.



. . . I could care less what trail a backpacker is hiking or whether he/she's on a thruhike or a section hike or an overnighter or living as a bum outside Damascus.

The bottom line categorization of and for these people is BAG NIGHTS---and how many they have.

BAG NIGHTS
I like it. Yet another metric of accomplishment that is more relevant than the term thru-hiker.


The most obvious proof of this is some guy pulling a completed thruhike of the AT and then writing a book about the experience, i.e. selling his brand. A similar thing are AT thruhikers "holding court" at shelter picnic tables---they've been on the trail for 3 months and think they know everything and will now take your questions---never asking a single question of their own. But this subject requires a separate thread.

Tipi, you're welcome to hijack this thread in an good controversial direction. My whole goal with the OP was to create thoughtful and challenging entertainment of those of us spending time out our computer screen instead of being good enough to get out and add to our bag night totals.

That being said, I think it's worth pointing out that the two most successful recent books on hiking the great American Scenic trails (Wild and A Walk in the Woods) were both written by people that did NOT finish a thru-hike, but they did have life affirming and life changing experiences worth millions of dollars in royalties. Hmmm. Go figure.

colorado_rob
06-04-2018, 13:18
I have to snicker at all of the angst that occurs over getting a JMT permit. You can put together a much better 212 mile stroll in the Sierra, with all the cool sections of the JMT but without the JMT permit hassle. But people are so set on hiking every step of that three letter trail. This photo is NOT on the JMT, it must not be nice. Extra credit if you know where this is.
42819 I was just at this lake, I think, last September.... on the SHR, can't quite remember the name, Marion Lake? Lake Marion or even Maryann? There's a plaque honoring the lady along the lake.

Anyway, the SHR blows away the JMT in terms of pure eye-tearing scenery, plus you see NO ONE, except of course during those few times it joins the JMT.

AS far as your OP, I do agree on a lot of your points, not so much on others, I personally don't see any problem doing the 2-letter or 3-letter trails, I just tend to do them at odd times or in the "wrong" direction. But then I like the off trail or odd-trail things even more.

What I'll NEVER get is why people that live back east never seem to hike out west. Weird. Travel is so easy and cheap these days, I just booked yet another PCT section trip, $76 direct to SFO, and after about 40 bucks of bus travel, I'm at Tuolumne, heading north. Yeah, I know, the three-letter "PCT" is popular, but I'll be way behind the thru-hiker bubble. And by the way, on my recent 702 mile Campo-Kennedy jaunt, I owned the actual trail at least half the days, it was only "crowded" at the avoidable popular camps and water sources. These long trails are B-I-G, plenty of room for lots of folks.

It is weird how much of a group of lemmings most are on the trails. I am one of them now and then, but I do resist.

nsherry61
06-04-2018, 13:32
. . .AS far as your OP . . . I personally don't see any problem doing the 2-letter or 3-letter trails. . .
I had no intention of suggesting that there is anything wrong with hiking the iconic national scenic trails or any other well hyped trails. I think they can provide awesome and fantastic experiences. They also provide a corridor of access to even more awesome experiences for people willing to step off the named trail. My issue was the lack of efficacy in using the terms thru-hike or section-hike as accomplishments in their own write or thru-hiker as a meaningful identifier of an accomplished backpacker.

And really, I'm just trying to stir up some entertaining trouble by disrespecting some sacred cows and questioning people's assumptions, assumptions that I do honestly disagree with of course.

jefals
06-04-2018, 13:38
It's a personal thing. if you set yourself a grand challenge and accomplish it, you have something to be proud of, and you will have learned something about yourself and will probably go on to achieve greater goals. If that challenge had been to thru-hike a 50 mile trail - or a 2,160 mile trail - and you did it - then you may proudly call yourself a thru-hiker.

On the other hand, maybe you're at a point in life where you've already accomplished major goals. Maybe now, you just like hiking. You may one day set out from Springer with no ambition other than enjoyment in mind. If you have an epiphany, 6 months later as you're walking off Katahdin that you just thru-hike the AT - well, it might just bring a smile to your face, and be no more meaningful than that. I can't find fault in either situation.

Tipi Walter
06-04-2018, 13:48
What I'll NEVER get is why people that live back east never seem to hike out west. Weird.


I know of some doctors and lawyers who won't go backpacking unless it's to exotic places---so they don't mind going thru all the logistics that's required to fly out with all their gear to the Wind River district or Glacier NP or Alaska or the Sierras or a hundred other "western" destinations---or over into the Himalayas etc.

Then again there's some of us who don't want to make a grand production in our attempts to live like a neanderthal for 2 or 3 weeks on our backpacking trips. Point is, why drive 12 hours or fly 4 hours and create a big resource-depleting endeavor with intricate shuttles just to backpack and live like a bum for a week or two??

So, if we're lucky we live within an hour of the best spots and keep returning to these spots with minimal travel time and maximum forest time.

Btw, I did a 30 day backpacking trip in the Sierras around Yuba River back in March 1989---but 7 of the days were spent hitchhiking from NC to CA.

Puddlefish
06-04-2018, 14:26
I had no intention of suggesting that there is anything wrong with hiking the iconic national scenic trails or any other well hyped trails. I think they can provide awesome and fantastic experiences. They also provide a corridor of access to even more awesome experiences for people willing to step off the named trail. My issue was the lack of efficacy in using the terms thru-hike or section-hike as accomplishments in their own write or thru-hiker as a meaningful identifier of an accomplished backpacker.

And really, I'm just trying to stir up some entertaining trouble by disrespecting some sacred cows and questioning people's assumptions, assumptions that I do honestly disagree with of course.

So, you're looking for a way to make yourself feel superior, by tearing at the verbiage people use to describe their hikes. Got it. Hope that works out well for you.

colorado_rob
06-04-2018, 14:32
I had no intention of suggesting that there is anything wrong with hiking the iconic national scenic trails or any other well hyped trails. I think they can provide awesome and fantastic experiences. They also provide a corridor of access to even more awesome experiences for people willing to step off the named trail. My issue was the lack of efficacy in using the terms thru-hike or section-hike as accomplishments in their own write or thru-hiker as a meaningful identifier of an accomplished backpacker.

And really, I'm just trying to stir up some entertaining trouble by disrespecting some sacred cows and questioning people's assumptions, assumptions that I do honestly disagree with of course.I understand. I was sorta referring to other posts kinda-sorta dissing the major acronym trails.

So, did I get that secret lake right?

colorado_rob
06-04-2018, 14:33
So, you're looking for a way to make yourself feel superior, by tearing at the verbiage people use to describe their hikes. Got it. Hope that works out well for you. Yikes! Go drink a beer or something. NS was just venting, he's injured.

Puddlefish
06-04-2018, 14:44
Yikes! Go drink a beer or something. NS was just venting, he's injured.

Pfft. I'm just helping him out, he said he was trying to stir up some entertaining trouble. Unless of course he was trying to stir up trouble only for other people, which is less entertaining in my opinion.

colorado_rob
06-04-2018, 14:53
Pfft. I'm just helping him out, he said he was trying to stir up some entertaining trouble. Unless of course he was trying to stir up trouble only for other people, which is less entertaining in my opinion.
Aha! I get it now. My bad. I'll help out some more then when back...

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 15:42
I was just at this lake, I think, last September.... on the SHR, can't quite remember the name, Marion Lake? Lake Marion or even Maryann? There's a plaque honoring the lady along the lake.


Yup. The current name of the lake(it was previously know by different names) is named IN MEMORY of Helen Marion LeConte. As CR said there's a bronze placque on the side of a boulder on the lakeshore. I have some pics somewhere of my own in archives. She was married to Joseph LeConte who some(most?) historical accounts was whom Mt LeConte in GSMNP was named. It takes some effort getting to the lake or, if you dare, down the chute Malto has in the picture. It'd be tough to completely circumnavigate Lake Marion at lakeshore level. It was possible to do so higher up.

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 15:48
I'm just trying to stir up some entertaining trouble by disrespecting some sacred cows and questioning people's assumptions, assumptions that I do honestly disagree with of course.


I bet you were the one rocking the canoe in summer camp. :p

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 16:11
I know of some doctors and lawyers who won't go backpacking unless it's to exotic places---so they don't mind going thru all the logistics that's required to fly out with all their gear to the Wind River district or Glacier NP or Alaska or the Sierras or a hundred other "western" destinations---or over into the Himalayas etc.

Then again there's some of us who don't want to make a grand production in our attempts to live like a neanderthal for 2 or 3 weeks on our backpacking trips. Point is, why drive 12 hours or fly 4 hours and create a big resource-depleting endeavor with intricate shuttles just to backpack and live like a bum for a week or two??

So, if we're lucky we live within an hour of the best spots and keep returning to these spots with minimal travel time and maximum forest time.

Btw, I did a 30 day backpacking trip in the Sierras around Yuba River back in March 1989---but 7 of the days were spent hitchhiking from NC to CA.



:confused: Some would say added intrigue for those places and difficulty of getting there are justified by them being strikingly unusual, endangered, etc. There are experiences there that aren't the same or one can't experience within one hr from our homes. That is why people travel...to experience the unknown not repeatedly clamp onto what they can always get within one hr of home. Also know that many folks only have 2 wks or so "vacation time" each yr. If that was you where'd you be going in those 2 wks every yr? Always to the same place?


I see your pt though that not every outdoor experience need to be of the grandest scale adventure.


Yuba River S and N has some nice single track and watering holes. Same with a bunch of other CA and OR Rivers.

nsherry61
06-04-2018, 20:13
So, you're looking for a way to make yourself feel superior, by tearing at the verbiage people use to describe their hikes. Got it. Hope that works out well for you.
No. I'm trying to suggest that our community uses these particular terms in ways that suggest the manner in which we choose to hike trails has more value than the trail itself, the time we spent hiking it, or the experiences we had, AND THAT I DISAGREE WITH.

nsherry61
06-04-2018, 20:17
I bet you were the one rocking the canoe in summer camp. :p
Uh, yeah. But then, I was doing it last week too. It's really fun and while hiking is off limits with my ankle screwed up I can still paddle a canoe.

Malto
06-04-2018, 20:52
I was just at this lake, I think, last September.... on the SHR, can't quite remember the name, Marion Lake? Lake Marion or even Maryann? There's a plaque honoring the lady along the lake.
Very good, Marion Lake on the SHR. I was amazed when I looked down that chute to the Lake. EVen more amazed that the Sierra Club took stock down it.

Puddlefish
06-04-2018, 22:22
No. I'm trying to suggest that our community uses these particular terms in ways that suggest the manner in which we choose to hike trails has more value than the trail itself, the time we spent hiking it, or the experiences we had, AND THAT I DISAGREE WITH.

There's a lot wrong with that theory. You're equating a standard term for a type of hike, with your very own supposition that those who use the term, aren't appreciating nature as much, or as properly as you. It's just a bizzare elitist strawman slaying theory. The thousands of successful thru hikers are not Borg, and I'd be shocked if even a tiny fraction of them believe anything
remotely close to what you've attributed to them.

Dogwood
06-04-2018, 23:05
There's a lot wrong with that theory. You're equating a standard term for a type of hike, with your very own supposition that those who use the term, aren't appreciating nature as much, or as properly as you. It's just a bizzare elitist strawman slaying theory. The thousands of successful thru hikers are not Borg, and I'd be shocked if even a tiny fraction of them believe anything
remotely close to what you've attributed to them.


Lotta ah dat goin on.

shelb
06-04-2018, 23:52
So sad you have these issues! I can truly emphasasize because I have had achilles tendonitus last year, and this year, I not only had knee surgery to repair two tears, but I am also recuperating from a fall tht resulted in my "face-planting into concrete... omg... that hurts!

Dogwood
06-05-2018, 00:14
Very good, Marion Lake on the SHR. I was amazed when I looked down that chute to the Lake. EVen more amazed that the Sierra Club took stock down it.


Ive seen the picture before on other websites and WB. It can be Goggled. When it was first posted here I knew I had hiked by that chute before a few times going down it once. I knew it was in the Sierras and likely the SHR. In a few posts we were playing Where's Waldo with hike or Nature locations. The poster gave a clue buy offering a pic of the plaque and it became obvious to me. Ive camped there a few times.


Ive heard they took stock down that chute but doubt it was a common entrance to get stock to Lake Maqrion. There are much easier ways to get there as a hiker and of course stock.

Traveler
06-05-2018, 07:41
I was just at this lake, I think, last September.... on the SHR, can't quite remember the name, Marion Lake? Lake Marion or even Maryann? There's a plaque honoring the lady along the lake.

Anyway, the SHR blows away the JMT in terms of pure eye-tearing scenery, plus you see NO ONE, except of course during those few times it joins the JMT.

AS far as your OP, I do agree on a lot of your points, not so much on others, I personally don't see any problem doing the 2-letter or 3-letter trails, I just tend to do them at odd times or in the "wrong" direction. But then I like the off trail or odd-trail things even more.

What I'll NEVER get is why people that live back east never seem to hike out west. Weird. Travel is so easy and cheap these days, I just booked yet another PCT section trip, $76 direct to SFO, and after about 40 bucks of bus travel, I'm at Tuolumne, heading north. Yeah, I know, the three-letter "PCT" is popular, but I'll be way behind the thru-hiker bubble. And by the way, on my recent 702 mile Campo-Kennedy jaunt, I owned the actual trail at least half the days, it was only "crowded" at the avoidable popular camps and water sources. These long trails are B-I-G, plenty of room for lots of folks.

It is weird how much of a group of lemmings most are on the trails. I am one of them now and then, but I do resist.

I run into a lot of people who live east of the Mississippi River on western trails, albeit the majority of people on those trails do tend to be people who reside within a few hours/few hundred miles of whatever trail I am on. Kind of a mirrored image of eastern trails in that respect.

In my case, I now have the resources and time necessary to do trails a few thousand miles from home at 64 years old than I could 30 years ago. To the "lemming" issue, when spending valuable time off or limited resources I would suspect many people opt to hike on notable trails like the PCT, JMT, or AT to make the most use of their limited time/resources at first. Once these have been done or discovery from those trails going to other trails, a lot of folks will start to gravitate to the lesser known trails and not be seen, perhaps adding to the notion they are never there.

nsherry61
06-05-2018, 09:04
There's a lot wrong with that theory. You're equating a standard term for a type of hike, with your very own supposition that those who use the term, aren't appreciating nature as much, or as properly as you. It's just a bizzare elitist strawman slaying theory. The thousands of successful thru hikers are not Borg, and I'd be shocked if even a tiny fraction of them believe anything
remotely close to what you've attributed to them.
No Puddlefish, I think you are still missing the point I'm trying to make.

That being said, it's really fun what you can find on google now and again . . .

42824

I'm not passing judgment on how anyone hikes. I'm passing judgment on how hikes are talked about. And, I'm not building a straw man, as I am addressing a habit or behavior that that already exists. I am attempting to generate discussion about how some of our community focuses on, maybe even obsession over equating how a hike is done as being the identity of that hike. And, although it can be an important part for some people, I don't think that how a hike is hiked is anywhere near as informative, useful, inspiring, or fun as other aspects of those hikes, like where they took place, how long they were, what the scenery was like or other things. I am suggesting that using thru-hike or section-hike as the primary identifiers of an experience is not only a poor description of the experience, but also tends to be burdened with a sense, in many peoples minds, of some level of elitism which I don't think is appropriate or justified.

Traffic Jam
06-05-2018, 09:47
No Puddlefish, I think you are still missing the point I'm trying to make.

That being said, it's really fun what you can find on google now and again . . .

42824

I'm not passing judgment on how anyone hikes. I'm passing judgment on how hikes are talked about. And, I'm not building a straw man, as I am addressing a habit or behavior that that already exists. I am attempting to generate discussion about how some of our community focuses on, maybe even obsession over equating how a hike is done as being the identity of that hike. And, although it can be an important part for some people, I don't think that how a hike is hiked is anywhere near as informative, useful, inspiring, or fun as other aspects of those hikes, like where they took place, how long they were, what the scenery was like or other things. I am suggesting that using thru-hike or section-hike as the primary identifiers of an experience is not only a poor description of the experience, but also tends to be burdened with a sense, in many peoples minds, of some level of elitism which I don't think is appropriate or justified.

You are skirting the fringes of what makes a person feel they have a purpose in life...feel useful...have self-identity.
Substitute any descriptive word for ‘hiker’. Friend, doctor, cyclist, mother, father, mechanic. Is it wrong to have self-identity?

Of course there can be negative effects. There are some who introduce themselves as thru-hikers and behave in a self-entitled way, but then so do many people who identify with what they believe is an elitist group. I once heard a nurse say she refused to take the trash out of a room because she worked hard to become a nurse, not a house keeper.

But there are many who don’t behave this way and use their skills, beliefs, and knowledge to assist others, or bond with others, or maybe have a shared experience.

’Thru-hiker’ is just a word. Who cares if someone describes themselves that way. It’s their behavior that matters.

Puddlefish
06-05-2018, 10:16
No Puddlefish, I think you are still missing the point I'm trying to make.

That being said, it's really fun what you can find on google now and again . . .

42824

I'm not passing judgment on how anyone hikes. I'm passing judgment on how hikes are talked about. And, I'm not building a straw man, as I am addressing a habit or behavior that that already exists. I am attempting to generate discussion about how some of our community focuses on, maybe even obsession over equating how a hike is done as being the identity of that hike. And, although it can be an important part for some people, I don't think that how a hike is hiked is anywhere near as informative, useful, inspiring, or fun as other aspects of those hikes, like where they took place, how long they were, what the scenery was like or other things. I am suggesting that using thru-hike or section-hike as the primary identifiers of an experience is not only a poor description of the experience, but also tends to be burdened with a sense, in many peoples minds, of some level of elitism which I don't think is appropriate or justified.

I think you're tilting at windmills. There are several reasons why thru is an excellent descriptive. Gear choices/swap out, resupply in multiple sections, transportation to and from the trail, overall budget, contact with family, all kind of reasons why it's useful to have a website like WB, with dedicated forums to the questions that might come up that are at least more pertinent to thru hikers.

Either you continue to describe your thoughts poorly, or you're moving the goal posts. Controlling the narrative is the first step in controlling the reality. It's not really your concern if someone chooses to identify as a thru hiker, and you have no access to their individual thought processes on why they choose to identify so. People hike for varying reasons. People hike for multiple reasons. You're acting like choosing to emphasize one aspect of the hike automatically precludes all other aspects of the hike. That's not remotely true. I can attempt to thru hike, and absolutely lose myself in the beauty of nature. It's a bit pretentious to suggest I should call myself a "Nature's Beauty Walker" so as not to offend your delicate sensibilities. If someone wants to use the trail as a race course, it's not my thing exactly, but goody for them, as long as they don't run over me. I don't want to be the judge of "stop liking what I don't like."

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 11:09
I run into a lot of people who live east of the Mississippi River on western trails, albeit the majority of people on those trails do tend to be people who reside within a few hours/few hundred miles of whatever trail I am on. Kind of a mirrored image of eastern trails in that respect.

In my case, I now have the resources and time necessary to do trails a few thousand miles from home at 64 years old than I could 30 years ago. To the "lemming" issue, when spending valuable time off or limited resources I would suspect many people opt to hike on notable trails like the PCT, JMT, or AT to make the most use of their limited time/resources at first. Once these have been done or discovery from those trails going to other trails, a lot of folks will start to gravitate to the lesser known trails and not be seen, perhaps adding to the notion they are never there. I think it works in the reverse too, the east/west thing.... folks I talk to out here in the west, who spent all or most of their lives here, can't imagine wanting to hike in the east. They are, of course, missing out.

Perhaps "lemming" is too harsh a word, but really, people tend to be lazy and just do what others do, like relatively new hikers... they hear through various forms of media of the "JMT", "AT", "PCT", whatever, and so just out of ignorance and being too lazy to do their own research, flock to these trails first, when in fact they might enjoy the dozens of other long-ish trails more (lack of crowds, etc). So I think it's more of a "lemming"/"lazy" thing than lack of resources. But I hear you too.

Drift pic, of the Marion Lake chute, my buddy heading down. Only tricky in a couple spots early, then easier with established trail. Yeah, the water really looks that blue, amazing place.

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 11:11
I think you're tilting at windmills. There are several reasons why thru is an excellent descriptive. Gear choices/swap out, resupply in multiple sections, transportation to and from the trail, overall budget, contact with family, all kind of reasons why it's useful to have a website like WB, with dedicated forums to the questions that might come up that are at least more pertinent to thru hikers.

Either you continue to describe your thoughts poorly, or you're moving the goal posts. Controlling the narrative is the first step in controlling the reality. Blah, blah, blah......" Clear example of the pot calling the kettle black (the moving on goal posts, controlling the narrative thing)....

MuddyWaters
06-05-2018, 11:22
I think it works in the reverse too, the east/west thing.... folks I talk to out here in the west, who spent all or most of their lives here, can't imagine wanting to hike in the east. They are, of course, missing out.

Perhaps "lemming" is too harsh a word, but really, people tend to be lazy and just do what others do, like relatively new hikers... they hear through various forms of media of the "JMT", "AT", "PCT", whatever, and so just out of ignorance and being too lazy to do their own research, flock to these trails first, when in fact they might enjoy the dozens of other long-ish trails more (lack of crowds, etc). So I think it's more of a "lemming"/"lazy" thing than lack of resources. But I hear you too.

Drift pic, of the Marion Lake chute, my buddy heading down. Only tricky in a couple spots early, then easier with established trail. Yeah, the water really looks that blue, amazing place.
Most of the lemmings...want...the crowds
They are there for the social experience, not the hiking

Unless you are pioneering routes....your a lemming.

But...its an easy way to go hike. When all the beta is done already.

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 11:29
Most of the lemmings...want...the crowds
They are there for the social experience, not the hiking

Unless you are pioneering routes....your a lemming.

But...its an easy way to go hike. When all the beta is done already.disagree on the first point, agree on the second. I, probably naively, believe the majority (maybe small majority, call it 51%?) of hikers like solitude. But ya know, with the prevalence of hiking-bloggers (who REALLY wants to read about your hike?) out there these days, you might be right.

Puddlefish
06-05-2018, 11:39
Clear example of the pot calling the kettle black (the moving on goal posts, controlling the narrative thing)....

I'm not moving the goalposts a bit. He's making up a personal definition of a commonly used term, and attributing negative aspects to that word that make no logical sense. I don't understand why people come on a hiking forum, and trash entire categories of hikers who are not harming them in any way, shape or form.

I get if if people want to complain about those on the trail who have negatively affected their hike. Those who have done something that ruined your enjoyment. Growling/biting dogs, drunken behavior, setting a campfire in a field upwind of your tent without a fire ring, littering, whatever your gripe may be.

But this is whining about someone's word choice to describe their hike. So, yeah, I will attempt to control the narrative in this case, before he does, because his narrative is just a wee bit divisive and controlling. Yeah, he's entitled to his thoughts, but... he flat out asked for a response and debate.

42826

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 12:15
I'm not moving the goalposts a bit. He's making up a personal definition of a commonly used term, and attributing negative aspects to that word that make no logical sense. I don't understand why people come on a hiking forum, and trash entire categories of hikers who are not harming them in any way, shape or form.

I get if if people want to complain about those on the trail who have negatively affected their hike. Those who have done something that ruined your enjoyment. Growling/biting dogs, drunken behavior, setting a campfire in a field upwind of your tent without a fire ring, littering, whatever your gripe may be.

But this is whining about someone's word choice to describe their hike. So, yeah, I will attempt to control the narrative in this case, before he does, because his narrative is just a wee bit divisive and controlling. Yeah, he's entitled to his thoughts, but... he flat out asked for a response and debate.

42826 Like I said earlier, go drink and beer and chill. Or go back on those meds. When did you stop taking those again? OR better yet, go hike! Your own way, of course.

Puddlefish
06-05-2018, 12:38
Like I said earlier, go drink and beer and chill. Or go back on those meds. When did you stop taking those again? OR better yet, go hike! Your own way, of course.

I've been hiking daily since the ice retreated, on the drier trails to avoid the mud. Questioning my mental state and sobriety is a pathetic excuse for an argument.

nsherry61
06-05-2018, 19:17
I've been hiking daily since the ice retreated, on the drier trails to avoid the mud. Questioning my mental state and sobriety is a pathetic excuse for an argument.

I don't know. You look a little inebriated if not a bit crazy in this image. :rolleyes:

42842

You also look like your darn satisfied with you're current situation, which I fully support.

nsherry61
06-05-2018, 19:40
. . . He's making up a personal definition of a commonly used term, and attributing negative aspects to that word that make no logical sense. . .
I'm not redefining "thru-hike" or "section-hike". I'm am challenging their relevance. And, the only negative aspects I am attributing to those terms is the lack of useful meaning and the relevance of what meaning they have. As noted before, I think they are fine terms for describing how a hike is done. I think they are a louse descriptor for a hike overall.


. . . I don't understand why people come on a hiking forum, and trash entire categories of hikers who are not harming them in any way, shape or form.
I've made no effort to trash any hikers or hikers achievements. I have only questioned the value we put on the term and concept of a thru-hike or section-hike.


. . . But this is whining about someone's word choice to describe their hike. . .
Yes. Now you are starting to get it.

Kaptainkriz
06-05-2018, 19:57
I've also heard people refer to what I would have described as an awesome hike as "just a section hike" or themselves as "only a section hiker" as if their experience or enjoyment of the outdoors is somehow less than that of a "through hiker".

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 20:43
I've been hiking daily since the ice retreated, on the drier trails to avoid the mud. Questioning my mental state and sobriety is a pathetic excuse for an argument.I call BS on the "hiking daily", and who's trying to make any sort of argument with you? Not me, I've learned long ago how fruitless it is to discuss such things as this thread's OP with you. And for the record, I was not questioning your sobriety, but lack thereof. That sounds backwards: I meant to say perhaps you should be LESS sober. Might help that mental state.

colorado_rob
06-05-2018, 20:45
I've also heard people refer to what I would have described as an awesome hike as "just a section hike" or themselves as "only a section hiker" as if their experience or enjoyment of the outdoors is somehow less than that of a "through hiker". I actually feel this way; I do a lot of long-trail hiking, but I learned a long time ago that 5-6 weeks away was about my limit, so I'll never be a long-trail thru hiker. When asked if I'm a "thru hiker", my response is always: "No, only a modest section hiker". BUT, I hold total respect and reverence for those that do manage to hike 4-5 months in a row. I guess I'm jealous. Or not, because I have so many other activities, 4-5 months straight hiking would interupt those other, equally fun things.

rocketsocks
06-05-2018, 23:53
Lotta ovulatin’ goin’ on!

nsherry61
06-06-2018, 12:22
Lotta ovulatin’ goin’ on!
I thought this conversation was interesting and productive, maybe even provocative, but with ovulatin' being one of the most magical parts of living existence, I think you are overstating the impact and potential of this thread.

Malto
06-06-2018, 12:35
I've also heard people refer to what I would have described as an awesome hike as "just a section hike" or themselves as "only a section hiker" as if their experience or enjoyment of the outdoors is somehow less than that of a "through hiker".

I had been a day hiker, weekend hiker, section hiker and thruhiker. Of all of those, I have the greatest respect for those section hikers that have taken years to finish a particular long trail. Why? Because every year they start the trail and have get back in trail shape. As soon as they do, the hike is done. Yet they will be back, blisters and all next year to continue on their way. A thruhiker goes through that once on a long hike, it's just a longer vacation.

BuckeyeBill
06-06-2018, 15:46
I actually feel this way; I do a lot of long-trail hiking, but I learned a long time ago that 5-6 weeks away was about my limit, so I'll never be a long-trail thru hiker. When asked if I'm a "thru hiker", my response is always: "No, only a modest section hiker". BUT, I hold total respect and reverence for those that do manage to hike 4-5 months in a row. I guess I'm jealous. Or not, because I have so many other activities, 4-5 months straight hiking would interupt those other, equally fun things.

Hey Rob, Never say Never. Circumstances could change in a heart beat for you. You are a few years older than me and I am getting things ready for a end to end hike of the AT. I have already done the PCT and the CDT. I had been saving for years to have my trail cash, then my grandmother past left me a very substantial amount of money. I have not left yet due to medical issues and surgeries, but when things come together it's bye bey I am gone.

rocketsocks
06-06-2018, 16:04
I thought this conversation was interesting and productive, maybe even provocative, but with ovulatin' being one of the most magical parts of living existence, I think you are overstating the impact and potential of this thread.way to double down, I like it! :clap