View Full Version : Is “flip flopping” in separate attempts, considered a thru-hike?
Not to diminish anyone who completed the entire length..but. I saw a post of a guy who “Flip-Flopped” he claims he went Va to Maine, and then Va. to Georgia in two separate stints. Is that not a considered a couple of section hikes, rather than an actual AT Thru-hike? Which I always considered to be the entire length in one attempt, either direction. Still a great accomplishment, no matter how it’s labeled.
A hike of the entire A.T. in 12 months or less, including a flip flop itinerary, is considered a thru-hike by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, the lead organization overseeing management and preservation of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.
With between 4,000 and 5,000 people a year attempting thru-hikes, most in a relatively narrow time frame, trail use must be dispersed in time or space to continue to be sustainable. Those attempting flip flop thru-hikers (or starting at the traditional start locations outside the most popular times) can help spread out use.
Spreading out hiker traffic reduces the social impacts associated with crowding, the impacts to natural resources associated with crowding, and the spread of disease (namely norovirus). Spreading out use also generally makes work easier for volunteers.
Spreading out use also helps trailside communities by evening out the flow of hikers and creating a longer season, instead of being overwhelmed by more hikers than they can serve.
ATC Recognition Policy
We hold high expectations of 2,000-milers that include treating the natural environment, A.T. communities, other hikers, and our agency partners--whose land the A.T. passes through--with kindness, respect, and cooperation;
We operate on the honor system;
We give equal recognition to thru-hikers and section hikers;
We recognize hikers regardless of sequence, direction, speed, or whether they carry a pack;
In the event of an emergency, such as a flood, a forest fire, or an impending storm, blue-blazed trails or officially required roadwalks are viable substitutes for the white-blazed route.
www.appalachiantrail.org/home/community/2000-miler-application (https://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/community/2000-miler-application)
I meet a lot of hikers whom call themselves thru hikers that obviously are not. I say who cares. If it is that important to someone that they want to lie, so be it, but what's worse than lying to yourself?
Thanks for the clarification, as I have only section hiked the AT in the Northeast, I was just unsure of how the actual “ Thru-hike” was determined. I have met a lot of northbound thruhikers at the AMC huts, and campsites in the N.H. Whites and up in Baxter State Park Me. In late summer and early fall, Both of which I frequent, and really enjoy the stories of the trail. Rock on!
Starchild
06-19-2019, 19:18
Officially if completed in year, it's a thru. In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not.
Maybe I'm biased as I'm a section hiker, but I don't see why folks get so wound up around "thru" hike status. It kind of turns into a pissing contest. Did it non-stop vs took a break, Flip-flopper, NOBO/SOBO, blue or yellow blazed a few miles, did more zeroes and hotels than the other guy, took longer, slackpacked..... This is truly a situation where HYOH matters!
stumpknocker
06-21-2019, 08:10
Officially if completed in year, it's a thru. In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not.
I don't agree with you at all. The "In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not." is your own thought.
Read what Laurie posted above and you will not find your idea of a thru hike anywhere in her post.
Flyin' Brian was not the first person to do a single year triple crown if one were to follow your guidelines. :)
Starchild
06-21-2019, 08:34
I don't agree with you at all. The "In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not." is your own thought.
Read what Laurie posted above and you will not find your idea of a thru hike anywhere in her post.
Flyin' Brian was not the first person to do a single year triple crown if one were to follow your guidelines. :)
LaurieIP's post does not conflict with mine if you read it as I said that ATC defines it as what Laurie says.
It's the spirit of the thru hike, what a thru hike is at it's heart that Lauri does not address but defaults strictly to the 'legalism' of the ATC definition.
It als involves what the 2 stints are, or more specifically where is the fuzzy line between 1 and 2 stints. If it is two stints, meaning separate and distinct long sections it would be at it's heart a section hike completion of the AT. If it's one it is a thru hike of the AT.
To that the person must decide if that hike is one or two, or just chose to hide behind the legalistic definition of the thru hike. That last part is what I feel is important. I always hate using legalistic definitions as it does ignore the heart, and to me, in the end, the heart is the only thing that what matters and being true to oneself is being true to one's heart, legalism and the ATC's definition is nothing and will not satisfy.
IDK about Flyin Brian, but if his triple crown it was planned as a single hike, before he ended any section portion he was doing, then it would include a AT thru no matter when it came about. Likewise flipping can be thus planned, especially with the intensive usage.
In this it sounds like the OP's person did not do a thru, but specifically 2 sections as I first read it, as separate times. However if he just flipped that is a completed thru hike.
stumpknocker
06-21-2019, 10:17
LaurieIP's post does not conflict with mine if you read it as I said that ATC defines it as what Laurie says.
It's the spirit of the thru hike, what a thru hike is at it's heart that Lauri does not address but defaults strictly to the 'legalism' of the ATC definition.
It als involves what the 2 stints are, or more specifically where is the fuzzy line between 1 and 2 stints. If it is two stints, meaning separate and distinct long sections it would be at it's heart a section hike completion of the AT. If it's one it is a thru hike of the AT.
To that the person must decide if that hike is one or two, or just chose to hide behind the legalistic definition of the thru hike. That last part is what I feel is important. I always hate using legalistic definitions as it does ignore the heart, and to me, in the end, the heart is the only thing that what matters and being true to oneself is being true to one's heart, legalism and the ATC's definition is nothing and will not satisfy.
IDK about Flyin Brian, but if his triple crown it was planned as a single hike, before he ended any section portion he was doing, then it would include a AT thru no matter when it came about. Likewise flipping can be thus planned, especially with the intensive usage.
In this it sounds like the OP's person did not do a thru, but specifically 2 sections as I first read it, as separate times. However if he just flipped that is a completed thru hike.
I'm very bad at making my point...but my point was that your view encompassed everyone's view when you said "Officially if completed in year, it's a thru. In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not." in your earlier post.
Had you said "In my view", I would not have had any issue.
You don't get to make the rules for everyone else. You can make your own rules, but don't include me in them please. I don't agree with your version...I have my own version.
In my version, if a person hikes every mile of the AT in a 365 period, that person is a thru hiker. They might walk 30 days, take 30 days off, walk 30 days, take another 30 days off and so on. They would still be considered a thru hiker by the ATC if they walked the entire trail in a year. They might consider their hike a section hike or a thru hike. Doesn't matter, because either would be correct in their view.
In my view, it is a lot harder doing the AT in sections than as a thru hike.
I don't like being argumentative, but I don't want to be included in someone's blanket statement that attempts to include me.
I think it's important to provide your view, but it's just that....your view.
HooKooDooKu
06-21-2019, 10:42
LaurieIP's post does not conflict with mine if you read it as I said that ATC defines it as what Laurie says.
It's the spirit of the thru hike, what a thru hike is at it's heart that Lauri does not address but defaults strictly to the 'legalism' of the ATC definition.
...
But you immediately start running in to legalisms because of the ways you might define a "stint'.
After all, where do you draw the line between the following to call it the "spirit" of a thru hike
1. Someone who never leaves the trail (all resupplies come to them).
2. Someone who steps off the trail for a few hours to resupply.
3. Someone who goes into town to resupply.
4. Someone who goes into town to resupply and spend the night.
5. Someone who goes into town to resupply and spend a couple of nights (i.e. takes an off trail zero)
6. Someone who goes into town because they are sick and spends a week (i.e. takes a week of zeros)
7. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home to attend a wedding, flies back and returns to the trail in less than 72 hours.
8. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home, gets sick, stays home for a week, flies back and returns to the trail.
9. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home, stays a month just because they want to, flies back and returns to the trail.
10. Someone who does a flip flop.
11. Someone who does a flip flop, but stays in a hotel to rest for a week before starting the next section.
12. Someone who does a flip flog, but goes home for 3 days before heading out to the next section.
13. Someone who does a flip flop, but goes home for 3 months between flops.
So it would seem item #1 above most definitely qualifies as the spirit of a thru, and #13 is only "legally" a thru.
Which step did we change from the "spirit" of a thru and fell into only a "legal" thru?
I believe there was a very good reason the ATC decided to simply define a thru as
We define a thru-hike as a hike of the entire A.T. in 12 months or less. (https://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/explore-the-trail/thru-hiking/faqs)
Starchild
06-21-2019, 10:46
But you immediately start running in to legalisms because of the ways you might define a "stint'.
After all, where do you draw the line between the following to call it the "spirit" of a thru hike
1. Someone who never leaves the trail (all resupplies come to them).
2. Someone who steps off the trail for a few hours to resupply.
3. Someone who goes into town to resupply.
4. Someone who goes into town to resupply and spend the night.
5. Someone who goes into town to resupply and spend a couple of nights (i.e. takes an off trail zero)
6. Someone who goes into town because they are sick and spends a week (i.e. takes a week of zeros)
7. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home to attend a wedding, flies back and returns to the trail in less than 72 hours.
8. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home, gets sick, stays home for a week, flies back and returns to the trail.
9. Someone who goes into town, catches a flight home, stays a month just because they want to, flies back and returns to the trail.
10. Someone who does a flip flop.
11. Someone who does a flip flop, but stays in a hotel to rest for a week before starting the next section.
12. Someone who does a flip flog, but goes home for 3 days before heading out to the next section.
13. Someone who does a flip flop, but goes home for 3 months between flops.
So it would seem item #1 above most definitely qualifies as the spirit of a thru, and #13 is only "legally" a thru.
Which step did we change from the "spirit" of a thru and fell into only a "legal" thru?
I believe there was a very good reason the ATC decided to simply define a thru as
My answer:
The person will ask that question and come up with their answer.
Starchild
06-21-2019, 10:48
I'm very bad at making my point...but my point was that your view encompassed everyone's view when you said "Officially if completed in year, it's a thru. In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not." in your earlier post.
Had you said "In my view", I would not have had any issue.
You don't get to make the rules for everyone else. You can make your own rules, but don't include me in them please. I don't agree with your version...I have my own version.
In my version, if a person hikes every mile of the AT in a 365 period, that person is a thru hiker. They might walk 30 days, take 30 days off, walk 30 days, take another 30 days off and so on. They would still be considered a thru hiker by the ATC if they walked the entire trail in a year. They might consider their hike a section hike or a thru hike. Doesn't matter, because either would be correct in their view.
In my view, it is a lot harder doing the AT in sections than as a thru hike.
I don't like being argumentative, but I don't want to be included in someone's blanket statement that attempts to include me.
I think it's important to provide your view, but it's just that....your view.
See post #11
stumpknocker
06-21-2019, 11:11
My answer:
The person will ask that question and come up with their answer.
Perfect! :)
Ours is a living language.
While no one group defines a word for everyone, some can certainly shape a word’s meaning in common discourse.
Increasingly, this is done to:
Spare hurt feelings and provide encouragement
Promote an agenda or specific course of action in others
Nothing wrong with that, but I think both come into play with the evolving definition of a thru hike.
But why worry about it?
As they say, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Hillbillyhanger
06-21-2019, 13:28
At the end of they day, who cares? Did they/you make the walk for a title or did you make the walk to enjoy the journey from Georgia to Maine? The "title" represents everything that I go out into the woods to get away from.
Not sure people care about it so much, but it is interesting to think that when future generations learn that a man by the name of Earl Shaffer was the first person to thru hike the AT, they may not automatically assume he walked from one end to the other in a single journey.
Hillbillyhanger
06-21-2019, 14:36
The debate about the term implies that one has accomplished something that the other hasn't. They've both walked the same distance. One was just privileged to have a time window to do it one trip. The other had to fight, claw, and scratch to find many windows of time to complete the journey. I think of them all as AT hikers. Then again, I just dont like labeling or putting people in boxes.
HooKooDooKu
06-21-2019, 15:24
The debate about the term implies that one has accomplished something that the other hasn't...
That comparison is belittling the accomplishment of completing a thru hike in only 12 months.
Under that logic, a person who can manage to run a marathon in under 3 hours is no better than someone who walks 1 mile every day for 21 days... because both have gone 21 miles.
Lone Wolf
06-21-2019, 15:58
Not to diminish anyone who completed the entire length..but. I saw a post of a guy who “Flip-Flopped” he claims he went Va to Maine, and then Va. to Georgia in two separate stints. Is that not a considered a couple of section hikes, rather than an actual AT Thru-hike? Which I always considered to be the entire length in one attempt, either direction. Still a great accomplishment, no matter how it’s labeled.
that's just a complete hike not a through hike
that's just a complete hike not a through hike
While Lone Wolf is arguably correct, I would like to go on record as objecting to his use of the adjective “just”.
That inclusion of that word (10% of this total!) turns a perfectly innocent statement into a clear micro aggression.
Lone Wolf
06-21-2019, 16:57
well it is just walkin' :)
Hillbillyhanger
06-21-2019, 17:07
That's right. They are both marathoners. 3 hours or 20 hours. Both marathoners. Thru, flip flop, etc are just terms trying to distinguish or make one better. I could debate that the section hiker has accomplished a harder task. They didn't have the luxury of taking 4 or 6 months off from work. They had to juggle work and planning and scheduling, etc. I'll just call them AT hikers. Use your labels if you'd like.
Starchild
06-21-2019, 20:25
...
I believe there was a very good reason the ATC decided to simply define a thru as... We define a thru-hike as a hike of the entire A.T. in 12 months or less. (https://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/explore-the-trail/thru-hiking/faqs)
And this is a problem it itself. If someone took 13 months to complete the trail and was on trail with full determination to get to the end, advancing the entire time, lets just say due to some disability it took this long, it would not be a thru hike according to the ATC definition. However it sure as hiker funk a thru hike. Also I'm sure that there are people who feel they are section hikers who just happened to complete it in a year, but know that it was never intended as such and consider themselves section hikers.
And that's the invalidation of ATC defining it 'in spirit', it does not include all thru hikes, and can include section hikers as thru hikers, thus is not defining thru hikes, but some 'lesser standard'. At the end of the day a person must conclude (if they care to) if they thru hiked the trail or not, regardless of ATC and above all be true to themselves.
Thus as stumpknocker (https://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/member.php/3022-stumpknocker) has said:
but I don't want to be included in someone's blanket statement that attempts to include me.
I think it's important to provide your view, but it's just that....your view
Bold mine
Where 'your' in 'your view' also should include ATC, if one wants to be consistent.
Yes they can set the legal definition, but that to me in the end will not satisfy and one must reconcile it to their heart.
greentick
06-22-2019, 21:58
well it is just walkin' :)
Heh. I was thinking "wait for it... wait for it..."
lonehiker
06-22-2019, 23:01
While Lone Wolf is arguably correct, I would like to go on record as objecting to his use of the adjective “just”.
That inclusion of that word (10% of this total!) turns a perfectly innocent statement into a clear micro aggression.
This has to be a joke.
This has to be a joke.
Yes.
I have much respect for Lone Wolf.
And his pith.
globetruck
06-23-2019, 09:10
Love the “thru”hiker lawyers on here. Who cares if you took a 3 day break in NYC or a 2 week break to go home for a family emergency or a 9 month break due to an injury. Everyone’s life events are different and not everyone is a 20-something who has unlimited time off, no family, and whose parents subsidize their lifestyle.
If you walk from Georgia to Maine, you’re entitled to a bit of bragging rights.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Love the “thru”hiker lawyers on here. Who cares if you took a 3 day break in NYC or a 2 week break to go home for a family emergency or a 9 month break due to an injury.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To answer your question, nobody that I know.
Traveler
06-24-2019, 08:47
I still cannot believe this is an issue that impacts the hikes of others.....
Just a word, unless one wants to make more of all this than is actually there.
this is a section hike. To be considered a thru hike, the people would have to have gone from va to Katahding and then flip south (Katahdin to VA) in same year.. ideally same trip.
FlyPaper
06-24-2019, 19:14
It is what it is. One can debate fine shades of meaning and make reasonable arguments that muddy things up. However, when you cross paths with someone on the trail and they ask "are you thru-hiking?", don't be pedantic. If you're planning on doing all in one year and you are still reasonably on that pace, just answer "yes". Otherwise answer "no". If you answer with just the words "flip-flopping", make sure your voice inflection indicates you're giving an affirmative answer.
I still cannot believe this is an issue that impacts the hikes of others.....
People love a good pissing contest.
Lone Wolf
06-25-2019, 15:22
the only true through hikers are the handful of record breakers. they start at one terminus and end at the other. no days off and continuity is not broken
trailmercury
06-25-2019, 15:59
the only true through hikers are the handful of record breakers. they start at one terminus and end at the other. no days off and continuity is not broken
But these folks aren't "just walkin"...they are running!!!
stumpknocker
06-25-2019, 19:07
the only true through hikers are the handful of record breakers. they start at one terminus and end at the other. no days off and continuity is not broken
fishing? funny
I still cannot believe this is an issue that impacts the hikes of others.....
I doubt that it ever has. Only internet hikers.
That comparison is belittling the accomplishment of completing a thru hike in only 12 months.
Under that logic, a person who can manage to run a marathon in under 3 hours is no better than someone who walks 1 mile every day for 21 days... because both have gone 21 miles.
While I don't care for this logic, I would have to admit to feeling similar feelings if I was somehow comparing hikes with someone, like in a social environment where I know a person and know what their hike was vs. mine. Not like I'm going to be on some sort of list of thru hikers that are being invited to the White House, LOL, where I might find fault with others on the list.
It also involves what the 2 stints are, or more specifically where is the fuzzy line between 1 and 2 stints. If it is two stints, meaning separate and distinct long sections it would be at it's heart a section hike completion of the AT. If it's one it is a thru hike of the AT.
In this it sounds like the OP's person did not do a thru, but specifically 2 sections as I first read it, as separate times. However if he just flipped that is a completed thru hike.
Officially if completed in year, it's a thru. In the spirit, if it's 2 (or more) 'separate stints' it is not.
I'm confused, are you saying a flip-flop in the same year is or isn't a thru hike IYO? Of course, a planned flip-flop is most certainly a thru hike. At heart, there shouldn't be an extended break between "stints", but sometimes things are out of your control. I think the 12-mo requirement imposed by the ATC comes pretty close to accommodating these thrus without being overly lenient. Its an arbitrary designation, but I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere, at least for giving out the 2000-miler recognition.
A hike of the entire A.T. in 12 months or less, including a flip flop itinerary, is considered a thru-hike by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, the lead organization overseeing management and preservation of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.
We operate on the honor system;
We give equal recognition to thru-hikers and section hikers;
www.appalachiantrail.org/home/community/2000-miler-application (https://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/community/2000-miler-application)
I meet a lot of hikers whom call themselves thru hikers that obviously are not. I say who cares. If it is that important to someone that they want to lie, so be it, but what's worse than lying to yourself?
My guess is what's worse is being somehow affiliated socially with someone you know didn't thru, but rather sectioned the AT, and is referring to their hike as a thru hike as opposed to what you might have done all at once. That's the only benefit I can see to this discussion, is how to put them in their place. Being that its based on an "honor system", I do think sometimes folks need to be called on their supposed honor, especially if you're going to continue to be around them. Otherwise, folks are going to lie to you about stuff, and there's nothing you're gonna do about it except not befriend them and not let it occupy space in your mind.
The great irony is that by suggesting it is import to use the word “thru hike” to describe a bifurcated 2000 mile hike, because to do otherwise can only suggest such a hike is “less than” a traditional end-to-end hike, one is revealing themselves to have bought into a false premise, i.e that a thru hike is somehow “better”.
News flash. It is not.
Here is an experiment just for fun.
Without going back to read any of the three dozen posts that preceded this one, write down how many you think have suggested that it is anyway “better” hike the trail in a tradition manner.
Then go back and see how some of your numbers match up with reality. But read each post s-l-o-w-l-y.
Then ask yourselves, if I could be so wrong on a meaningless thread on WB, what else have I misunderstood that matters?
KnightErrant
06-26-2019, 15:53
Part of my reasoning for my Nobo thru-hike was the appeal of the classic, continuous line from GA to ME. But I definitely respect the ATC as the institution with the most legitimate right to establish an official definition. They say it's the whole trail within 12 months. And I see why they have defined it that way. Realistically, the public interest in the Appalachian Trail is so great that limiting a "thru-hike" to a particular direction is not sustainable. If all 4000 people who want to attempt a thru-hike every year started in late March at Amicalola, we would destroy the trail. So instead of looking down on flip floppers as "not real thru hikers," I appreciate them being creative with their itinerary, because that helps spread out the impact on this trail that I love and want to preserve. Plus, a lot of people flip flop because a classic April-September thru-hike doesn't fit into their life schedule (work, school, kids, etc.) and I think it's commendable that they're finding a way to make it work within the parameters of their situation.
But whenever people get pedantic thru-hiking vs. section-hiking, I think it's valuable to recall that ATC doesn't even make a distinction between the two when recognizing 2000-milers. If you the hike the whole trail, that's an accomplishment. I wouldn't worry too much beyond that.
Hillbillyhanger
06-26-2019, 18:04
A walk in the woods is a walk in the woods. Now, how does slack packing integrate into the definition of a thru hike....
[QUOTE=Hillbillyhanger;2250273 Now, how does slack packing integrate into the definition of a thru hike....[/QUOTE]
Well played...as the game continues.
slowdive
06-26-2019, 22:43
This is why I love Whiteblaze!
wishbone
06-26-2019, 23:04
Bottom Line....Hike Your Own Hike. Don't fall in to the trap of what other's think.
Full transparency, I'm happy to be a Section Hiker working My Way North.
Bottom Line....Hike Your Own Hike. Don't fall in to the trap of what other's think.
This. It's all words.
The debate about the term implies that one has accomplished something that the other hasn't. They've both walked the same distance. One was just privileged to have a time window to do it one trip. The other had to fight, claw, and scratch to find many windows of time to complete the journey. I think of them all as AT hikers. Then again, I just dont like labeling or putting people in boxes.
Couldn't agree more regarding putting labels on folks. I think the ATC got it right making it a 2000-miler designation, irregardless of the "thru hike" specification. And regarding slack packing, isn't that what the record holders are? Got no problem with it.
Couldn't agree more regarding putting labels on folks. I think the ATC got it right making it a 2000-miler designation, irregardless of the "thru hike" specification. And regarding slack packing, isn't that what the record holders are? Got no problem with it.
Etymology still matters, right?
Nothing wrong with a community adopting new meanings for a word (think gangbanger) but worthwhile to ponder how, when and why the long-standing original definition evolved — or if it really has.
The “term “2000-Miler” is special, in that it is commonly understood to be a specific award/recognition conferred by the ATC, which as such, that they alone can define however they wish.
Furlough
06-28-2019, 05:39
A walk in the woods is a walk in the woods. Now, how does slack packing integrate into the definition of a thru hike....
....and by some folks interpretation in this thread, if as an example you are NOBO, stay at a hostel, get a shuttle north, slack pack back south, you are no longer a thru-hiker.
Traveler
06-28-2019, 07:09
To further complicate this perpetual minutiae, on a philosophical level, one can only be a "thru hiker" after the hike has completed. One can say they are attempting a thru hike, but cannot say they are a thru hiker without having finished, much as someone cannot say they have read Moby Dick as they are reading it.
....and by some folks interpretation in this thread, if as an example you are NOBO, stay at a hostel, get a shuttle north, slack pack back south, you are no longer a thru-hiker.
Since we both joined WB about the same time, you may recall that Back in the Day there was a lot of discussion about slack packing, which was often equated with "walking", versus "hiking," which meant carrying a pack with the three essentials. Quite a few argued that a person who slack packed the AT wasn't a thru hiker because they were walking instead of hiking.
HooKooDooKu
06-28-2019, 10:10
To further complicate this perpetual minutiae, on a philosophical level, one can only be a "thru hiker" after the hike has completed. One can say they are attempting a thru hike, but cannot say they are a thru hiker without having finished, much as someone cannot say they have read Moby Dick as they are reading it.
But "hiker" is an action word.
So to be a "thru hiker" should imply you are attempting a "thru hike" (i.e. reading a book), and once completed, you could say you have "thru hiked" the AT (read the book).
Maybe the “best” thru hiker is a nobo who completed in one continuous hike, no zeros off trail, no yellow blazing or blue blazing or pink blazing. They are also ultra light and had no injuries. They look dashing in hiking togs. But are the others not also thru hikers if they completed within the year as described by the powers that be, the Appalachian trail conservancy? Are the people who hiked but didn’t meet this criteria not hikers.My respect to all who have finished the AT, and all who do their best hiking in whichever way they can, and who enjoy nature and the satisfaction that being outdoors gives them.
This is debate seems to be divisive, not positive, and seems to want to judge personal abilities with the intent of declaring “I’m better then you”. Let it go. HYOH. Help your fellow hiker when you can and graciously accept the help of others. That’s what makes the AT and the hiker community so great
why by am I even writing this drivel? Just this morning I was out on a local trail with my dog. When I look back on my day in the evening, my walk is almost always my high point. Best to you all.
To say that the subject is divisive is one thing, to say that this debate is divisive is a way of shutting down discussion. IMO discussion is always good, even if there is some collateral damage.
Agreed that you are a thru-hiker if making an attempt. If the attempt fails, you didn't thru hike. You're not a thru hiker once you're off the trail, completed or not. You're simply one that has done a thru hike if completed, or a 2000-miler if you prefer that.
But again, I don't like putting labels on anyone, but would pretty much accept any label one puts on themselves with very few exceptions.
FlyPaper
06-28-2019, 15:31
A smart person understands that words can carry meaning whether or not one agrees to the legitimacy of the definition. Also, a person of integrity doesn't want to be dishonest and thus wants to avoid gross negligence in being up to date in common understandings of a word's meanings.
Some extreme purists may insist that thru-hiking has to be continuous and one-way. Although defensible, it is not that commonly held.
So if you started in Georgia, walked north, took one week off in July to attend a wedding, returned to the same point and resumed walking north with the intent to finish at Katahdin you need to decide what words you will use in conversation. If you hike 2200 miles, your intent WILL come up in conversation and unless you intend on being a total hermit, you WILL have to choose what words you use. This is not intended to judge anything superior to anything else. Close family members know your precise details. But you will cross paths with many people and strike up conversations with some. There are some on the forum here who would not call you a thru-hiker. Most would. So what do you do are in a brief conversation in a hostel and another hiker asks if you are thru-hiking?
You could respond: "It's all walking". That might seem kind of off-putting. If you want to avoid being unfriendly, this might be hard to pull off with this kind of answer.
You could respond: "No". For a person of integrity this might feel dishonest and it is going to seem dishonest to almost anyone who spends more time with you and learns more details. At the very least, this is highly misleading. And likely you are going to fit more in the company of other "thru-hikers" than you would weekenders or section hikers.
You could respond: "No, I did a long section hike to Damascus, took a week off, returned to Damascus and resumed walking up until this point and intend to reach Maine by the end of the hiking season." This paints a clear picture, but most of which the person probably didn't care about when making light conversation. (If you see me on the trail, please don't answer this way).
You could respond: "Yes". There might be some purist that consider this to be the wrong answer, but even those purist would likely be smart enough that your "yes" leaves open the chance you are not trying to claim you are meeting their purest requirements. Some purist may disagree with your choice of words, but they are not so likely to be misled by them.