PDA

View Full Version : What I'd do Differently Next Thru-hike



Johnny Swank
12-22-2006, 17:35
I was thinking about the Appalachian Trail on the way to work today. I did a southbound thru-hike of the Appalachian Trail in 2000, and if I were to do it again, I'd change up a few things. I'd love to hear others opinions on what they'd change. Hindsight being better than foresight (much better sometimes!) I thinks it's good to reflect on these things.

Take less zero days. On my thru-hike, I took at least 30 days completely off over 6 months. On the Mississippi River expedition (http://www.sourcetosea.net) we took off 6, 3 of which were to dodge a hurricane. On the AT, I got into a bad habit of doing big miles for a few days, then having to take a day off to recover. I think you're better off doing a more moderate pace daily, and hike farther between resupplies. Big mile days beat the tar out of you over time.

Use a hammock There's a weight penalty, partially offset because I could use the down underquilt as insulation and ditch a jacket. I don't know how much I'd actually do that in the winter, but I'll be damned if I'm carrying another fleece jacket through the late spring through early fall again. A hammock opens up a ton more places to sleep each night, as well as being more comfortable once you get the learning curve down.

Cook more over a fire. I'd just put 3 stakes in the ground and build a tiny fire between them. In decent weather, I could see doing this about half the time. The rest of the time I'd use my trusty homemade alcohol stove. I've got 1,500 miles on a Frito-lay refried bean can stove so far. Stupid simple to use, because I'm a simpleton.

Wear trailrunners instead of sandals? I thru-hiked in Chacos, but getting a system together for cold-weather use was interesting to say the least. Still have all my toes though. Trail runners are a lighter option.

Make more of my own gear. So far I've sewn our packs, stove, windshirt, stuff sacks, and few other things. I still use an 8x10 silnylon tarp that's in good shape, but I'd consider making an oversized poncho for use with a hammock (I hate ponchos though).

Carry less weight. I probably had about 18-22 lbs in my pack before food and water. I think I can easily get that down to 10 pounds with just a few changes. Once your base weight is in the low teens, who cares about adding an extra couple days of food?

Carry some way to email and post photos instead of dealing with public access computers. I wasted a lot of time on the computers in towns, both finding the libraries and mindlessly surfing around. I'm writing an article about the setup I'd use, but in a nutshell it's a Palm Treo with a folding keyboard. Bear in mind that I'm usually writing a newspaper column while I'm hiking, so my needs are a little different. A Pocketmail system (http://pocketmail.com) is the way to go if you're not doing overly long posts or need internet access. Write your emails, go to a pay phone and send/receive emails, and then be on your way. Simple, easy, elegant - but I'd hate to try and hammer out a bunch of pages out on that thing. We used one on the Mississippi but depended on our Gmail account for most stuff.

Not do it on a shoestring budget. Worrying about every dime spent is a drag on a long trip. I'm still a cheap dude and would like to do it on the cheap just as a challenge, but knowing you have some extra money to fall back on gives some good piece of mind.

I'd consider going from Georgia to Maine, but then get over it and realize that southbound is the only way to hike. I hate being in crowds all the time, and that northbound swarm would drive me nuts.

Use a Gcast Audioblog (http://www.gcast.com/) instead of emails just to stay in touch. I used this on my recent Cape Fear River trip (http://sourcetosea.net/CapeFear/overview.html), and it worked great. All you do is set up a free account with Gcast, call in to there 1-800 number, and leave a message that shows up as a podcast on their website. It was a super easy way to let everyone know where I was at, and give them a real-time taste of what was happening.

Lone Wolf
12-22-2006, 17:37
I would change nothing. I would SOBO if anything.

Footslogger
12-22-2006, 17:38
Only thing different will be having BadAss Turtle as my trail partner ...

'Slogger

Butch Cassidy
12-22-2006, 17:56
The only thing I would change would be go with my Best Friend. No wait that's what I'm doing in 07. My Son (The Sundance Kid) and I leave Feb 27th. Lock up ur daughters, Hide the horses, The Wild Bunch Rides Again!:cool: Butch

Hammock Hanger
12-22-2006, 20:16
I would lighten up. Like we noted in another post it's only a hike. Unfortunately I am one of those goal oriented people. Not that I wasn't having fun only sometimes the pain was immense and I was unwilling to give in for a long time. -- Also I would not spend months overplaning the thing. Just go hike, enjoy.

MOWGLI
12-22-2006, 20:24
I'd carry a fishing rod in Maine.

I'd walk a bunch of blue blaze trails.

I'd skip whatever trail I didn't feel like hiking.

SOBO

fiddlehead
12-22-2006, 21:59
No Different. They've all been great hikes, different but great. Just go with the flow.

mweinstone
12-22-2006, 22:31
i will pack a fish next time. thats it. a five pound raw salmon. and a peice of foil. i will eat fish like a bear in the mountains dammit!

Roland
12-23-2006, 10:15
Jack Tarlin answered the same question, a few years back. I thought it was a very honest, introspective and candid response. If you haven't read it already, check it out (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/article.php?p=54384&postcount=1).

Lyle
12-23-2006, 11:21
Excellent Post, including Jack Tarlin's. I think if I were to thru-hike, I would carry a copy of these and read them over occasionally during the hike to remind me not to get caught up in the high-mileage, group mentatlity.

Hammock Hanger
12-23-2006, 11:48
Jack Tarlin answered the same question, a few years back. I thought it was a very honest, introspective and candid response. If you haven't read it already, check it out (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/article.php?p=54384&postcount=1).

Jack: I never pass up a good swimming hole!!!:D

MOWGLI
12-23-2006, 12:00
Jack: I never pass up a good swimming hole!!!:D

Anytime I can camp near a lake or pond and swim before crashing, I always feel much better. Nothing like washing off all that stickiness before bedtime!

Jack Tarlin
12-23-2006, 12:40
Thanx Roland and Lyle....of all the stuff I've posted here over the years, that little essay is at the top of my list (along with the Resupply Artcicle) as far as things I think might be useful to prospective hikers.

rafe
12-23-2006, 12:41
Anytime I can camp near a lake or pond and swim before crashing, I always feel much better. Nothing like washing off all that stickiness before bedtime!

For that reason and a few others besides, I rate Pierce Pond Shelter as the best I've seen on the AT. But I've missed a few. ;)

Lone Wolf
12-23-2006, 12:43
For that reason and a few others besides, I rate Pierce Pond Shelter as the best I've seen on the AT. But I've missed a few. ;)

It would be a lot prettier if NO shelter were there. Shelters cheapen the woods.

rafe
12-23-2006, 12:47
It would be a lot prettier if NO shelter were there. Shelters cheapen the woods.

!!! Wow. I didn't know you'd sworn off shelters, Wolf. It would surely change the entire nature of the AT (big-time!) if your wish came true. Wonder how others feel about this?

Lone Wolf
12-23-2006, 12:50
!!! Wow. I didn't know you'd sworn off shelters, Wolf. It would surely change the entire nature of the AT (big-time!) if your wish came true. Wonder how others feel about this?

I won't even stay in a shelter if it's raining and empty. They're dirty, nasty boxes.

rafe
12-23-2006, 12:56
They're dirty, nasty boxes.

I guess it depends on what you put in 'em. ;)

rafe
12-23-2006, 13:01
Wolf, what about the social aspects of a hike? Doesn't that matter? Wouldn't that suffer if everyone tented by themselves? And if they tent in groups, wouldn't that also be destructive of the trail environment? You know, I've never heard anyone (yet) propose that AT shelters shoud be eliminated. Your remark was the first I'd ever heard to that effect.

MOWGLI
12-23-2006, 13:06
You know, I've never heard anyone (yet) propose that AT shelters shoud be eliminated. Your remark was the first I'd ever heard to that effect.

You're still a newbie here on WB. Stick around and you'll see it again.

Jack Tarlin
12-23-2006, 13:06
On the other hand, Terrapin, fewer shelters might mean FEWER people out there, which in some locations, might not be such a bad thing. You're right to be concerned about high impact on tentsites, but without creature comforts like shelters, many folks probably wouldn't be out there at all. :-?

rafe
12-23-2006, 13:13
On the other hand, Terrapin, fewer shelters might mean FEWER people out there, which in some locations, might not be such a bad thing. You're right to be concerned about high impact on tentsites, but without creature comforts like shelters, many folks probably wouldn't be out there at all. :-?

So is that the idea? To eliminate casual hikers? Nah, seriously -- I'm not up on what the Trail intelligentsia is up to. Is this notion being seriously considered by the ATC? Any papers, articles, speeches, cites? I've got some catching up to do...

Jack Tarlin
12-23-2006, 13:33
Nobody that I know of is seriously advocating removing the shelters, tho in some cases and locations, folks are considering a moratorium on building any new ones.

And nobody's trying to keep "casual" hikers out of the woods.

There is a feeling in some parts, however, that many of the problems in the backcountry are created or are made worse by the "casual" folks, i.e. the ones who expect and require accomodations, perks, etc. Limiting shelters, i.e. making it a little "rougher" for some folks might encourage some folks to stay home, and in same cases, that might not be a bad thing.

rafe
12-23-2006, 13:40
Limiting shelters, i.e. making it a little "rougher" for some folks might encourage some folks to stay home, and in same cases, that might not be a bad thing.

Benton MacKaye must be spinning in his grave... :(

rafe
12-23-2006, 13:52
You're still a newbie here on WB. Stick around and you'll see it again.

Really. I felt like Rip Van Winkle, hearing Wolf's idea. Trying to figure out how far it's spread.

Sly
12-23-2006, 14:04
I wouldn't eliminate the shelters because it would cause undo impact. But as Jack mentioned I agree with putting a moratorium on new ones.

As far as shelters adding casuals users, it's a Catch-22 similar to the full service huts in the Whites. Those mountains wouldn't be nearly as crowded if hikers needed to carry what's normally considered essential. Eliminate the full service huts and impact in minimized.

rafe
12-23-2006, 14:12
As far as shelters adding casuals users, it's a Catch-22 similar to the full service huts in the Whites. Those mountains wouldn't be nearly as crowded if hikers needed to carry what's normally considered essential. Eliminate the full service huts and impact in minimized.

A lot of "serious" hikers have issues with the AMC huts, and the AMC in general. I see them as yuppie havens these days. But even so, I'd always prefer that more people came to the woods than fewer. The woods are our oxygen. City folks suffocate for lack of it.

ScottP
12-23-2006, 15:13
More people in the woods means more people voting in favor of the woods. Let 'em come.

rafe
12-23-2006, 15:16
More people in the woods means more people voting in favor of the woods. Let 'em come.

Thank you.

mnof1000v
12-23-2006, 15:46
Not that I mind the banter, but I wanted to chime in on the actual topic of the thread...

I know I'll be out there again, and there's definite changes I would undertake.

I think I'd be totally unpredictable. Early in my hike this season, I focused on early starts and long days. I liked it, but sometimes I felt like I was beating myself up for no good reason. Later in my hike, I would start my day no earlier than 8 AM, just on principle. It was like I decided one way was totally wrong. But now I don't think that's true. I now know what I am capable of, so I think I'd be more open to an early start if the weather's nice, or a day to sleep in if I so choose.

In the future, my "planned" destination for the day wouldn't matter. There were so many things to do and see each day, but often I'd cut short my side-trips so I could make up my miles to get to a campsite or shelter. In hindsight, that just won't do.

My body will become a temple. Silly it may sound, but on my hike I almost never listened to my body. But, when my gear broke, I immediately acted. When I had a nasty cut or a pulled muscle, I tried to ignore it. That conception led to an infection that nearly cost me Katahdin. Never again will that happen.

I'll try to convince more people that weight is less important than comfort. I ran into far too many people who thought I carried too many things, or felt it necessary to point to their uber-light gear. Rarely did I try to argue my side of the matter. That ought to change. The 20-25 lbs on my back keeps me comfortable in virtually any condition. Yes, I carry a tent. Yes, I have more than one pair of socks. Weight, so long as it keeps you comfortable, is no big deal.

I'll never regret a zero day. I took on this ideology late in my hike, and I think more people need to as well. So what if you end your hike a few days later. Who cares about the silly schedule? Just take things as they happen, and your experience will be even more enjoyable.