View Full Version : What is an 'unsupported' hike?
Saw this phrase in another thread, I was wondering what various people's definition of it is?
Regards,
J.
wilconow
08-03-2008, 12:13
No one is bringing you food or water, giving you a place to sleep, etc.
Welcome. Now wait for the explosions to happen... You probably won't believe this simple subject can cause as much disagreement as it probably will.
That said, my definition of unsupported means there is no one travelling with you providing food/gear/water/shelter/etc. Supported hikes are often for those looking to move as quickly as possible, so they carry a fanny pack and get resupplied at road crossings. The MASSIVE majority of thru-hikers (99+%) are unsupported.
But you'll probably hear some extreme interpretations:
- If you don't hunt and kill everything along the way, you're supported.
- If you slackpack (somebody drops you off in the morning with a daypack and then picks you that afternoon) even once over a six-month thru-hike, you're supported.
- If somebody mails your pre-packed mail drops to you, you're supported.
- If you stay in hotels/motels/hostels/somebody's back yard, you're supported.
Most folks would disagree with the above examples, but there are likely to be a few that vigorously defend their position.
For the most part, nobody cares about whether a thru-hike is supported or unsupported unless it is attached to a record of how fast someone hiked.
I figure it's much more important to just be out there hiking in the first place.
Jager,
Hikers sometimes choose to have others support their hike through various means.
Some hikers, who are attempting to complete the Trail as quickly as possible, may have a crew who follows along in a vehicle. The crew may bring food, set-up camp, carry gear etc, so the hiker can focus on walking as many miles per day, and as quickly as possible.
In other cases "support" may be less clear, and hikers don't always agree on a definition. For instance, if someone back home, prepares dehydrated meals, and sends them to a hiker at every town, is that support? What if the meals were prepared by the hiker and the boxers were packed by the hiker? If all the other person does is mail them, is that any different? You can see where the line blurs.
Anyway, it's nice to see a Manitoban on the list. Welcome to Whiteblaze.
jersey joe
08-03-2008, 12:46
That said, my definition of unsupported means there is no one travelling with you providing food/gear/water/shelter/etc. Supported hikes are often for those looking to move as quickly as possible, so they carry a fanny pack and get resupplied at road crossings.
Welcome Jager.
I think Bearpaw does a pretty good job with how he explains "unsupported" here.
Lone Wolf
08-03-2008, 12:48
Saw this phrase in another thread, I was wondering what various people's definition of it is?
Regards,
J.
it means you carry your own pack. nobody meets you at roads crossings to give you food and drink
CrumbSnatcher
08-03-2008, 13:30
it means you carry your own pack. nobody meets you at roads crossings to give you food and drink
it doesn't matter if you recieve maildrops from someone else, prepared by them or you. like wolf says just carry your own pack and no planned out,car support. stick your thumb out to get to towns does not interfer with a non-supported hike. i worked for my trail money,if i pay for my own hotel,motel,hostels whatever thats not supported. huge ammounts of slackpacking all the way up the trail by these hotels,motels,hostels or friends in the area thats supported. IMO:D
Apparently it depends on the trail. For example, if you're out to set the speed record on the JMT "unsupported" means, even though you pass by a couple stores and restaurants, and a PO, you carry all your food from beginning to end.
Apparently it depends on the trail. For example, if you're out to set the speed record on the JMT "unsupported" means, even though you pass by a couple stores and restaurants, and a PO, you carry all your food from beginning to end.
It's a good point. I suppose that's because the JMT is just over 210 miles and the AT is 2170+ now. But again, it's a matter for records.
When I was hiking the JMT, I didn't feel supported because I could walk into Tuolomne and grab a burger. Just lucky.
Jason of the Woods
08-03-2008, 15:45
it means you carry your own pack. nobody meets you at roads crossings to give you food and drink
Yep. You basically do your hike by yourself and resupply every few days in trail towns. In my opinion the only way to hike.:D
CrumbSnatcher
08-03-2008, 16:11
i enjoyed just buying from stores along the way. i used a bounce box a few times though. batteries and dog supplies(bears meds, first aid extras and such)
and I thought it meant going 'commando'.
Analogman
08-03-2008, 16:20
I figure it's much more important to just be out there hiking in the first place.
Amen brother, amen. It's about the journey, not the destination. If getting there in a hurry was the goal then we'd all drive to Maine and call it a day.
and I thought it meant going 'commando'.
Heh heh... :D:D:D:D
Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr3wI39cuGQ)
It's a good point. I suppose that's because the JMT is just over 210 miles and the AT is 2170+ now. But again, it's a matter for records.
When I was hiking the JMT, I didn't feel supported because I could walk into Tuolomne and grab a burger. Just lucky.
Personally I don't agree with the definition (I think it's fine to stop at Reds or TM) but Reinhold who held the record for several years established it and from what I understand set the standard that many adhere to. Here's a reflection on someone attempt to break Reinhold's record.
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/john_muir_trail_unsupported_record_attempt_results .html
I think it's since been broken. The reason I bring it up is others have "set" records on the LT with resupply, rides from the trail etc. while I think Coup did it "alpine style" carrying all his needs from end to end.
Saw this phrase in another thread, I was wondering what various people's definition of it is?The term may haave specific definitions for various record purposes, but for the rest of us, everyone has their own definition, just like everyone has their own idea about why and how they hike. Well, not everyone. Terms like "supported" "and unsupported" are used as in Post #10 and #13 to define the "right" way to hike. "My way is the only real way to hike. If you hike fast or hike long days or or take too many days off or carry a big pack or a tiny pack or hike for a record or this or that or anything other than what I like, you're doing it wrong and what's the point."
Interesting first post. Will post #2 be, "Do you have to hike past every white blaze in order to deserve a 2000 miler patch?"
Personally I don't agree with the definition (I think it's fine to stop at Reds or TM) but Reinhold who held the record for several years established it and from what I understand set the standard that many adhere to. Here's a reflection on someone attempt to break Reinhold's record.
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/john_muir_trail_unsupported_record_attempt_results .html
I think it's since been broken. The reason I bring it up is others have "set" records on the LT with resupply, rides from the trail etc. while I think Coup did it "alpine style" carrying all his needs from end to end.
The current supported JMT record, set last August, is held by Sue Johnston (http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=9357), with a time of 3 days, 20 hours. The unsupported record was also set last August by Michael Popov (http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=8943), in 4 days, 5 hours, 25 minutes.
Impressive, but when I head back that way, I intend to take up to three weeks. Those mountains are just too incredible for me to rush through them.
Thanks for the answers, everyone...much appreciated. Also, I'm impressed by the speed/unsupported hikers w/o any desire to emulate them. As several pointed out, what's the rush?
Regards,
J.
Blissful
08-03-2008, 20:39
Everyone has to have support from somewhere. Even if it's a hiker that gives you some of his hiker food (a candy bar) or you stop for trail magic, or someone gives you a ride to town - that's all "support." If you want to get technical.
The truth is - it doesn't matter. You still have to hike the thing and the AT is hard enough.
Monkeywrench
08-04-2008, 08:40
I think an unsupported hike is when you go even though your spouse refused you permission. :-)
In my view an unsupported hike means you carry all food, clothing, shelter etc with you as you hike up the trail. This in my mind rules out slack packing where you stay at a place (ie a hostel) for multiple days are driven to a point north of the trail (for Northbounders) then you hike south to the hostel carrying only day hike essentials to a point where. By this definition, Far less than the proposed 99 percent of hikers are unsupported. It is amazing how many hikers slack pack!
DavidNH
Jason of the Woods
08-04-2008, 14:39
I think an unsupported hike is when you go even though your spouse refused you permission. :-)
That is good. I am embarking on one of those soon.;)