View Full Version : I might not hike with a map
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
Jason of the Woods
08-10-2008, 17:49
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
You don't need them. Just get town maps so you can find the AYCE buffets.
You can probably get away with it. But I don't recommend it personally.
Besides the obvious "What do I do if there's an emergency?" issue, there's a decent amount of convenience and options that disappear without a map. Guidebooks usually list, at most, one road that goes into a town. In many cases, there are 2 or 3 routes that will do so, but you won't know this without a map.
Views mean less to me when I have no frame of reference for them. But when I can sit and orient my map, I know what that little town is, or what that peak is called, and often, "WOW! I just hiked over that?!" or "Man, I'm going to hike over that?!" Maps help me to feel much more a part of the world around me rather than Hansel and Gretl looking for the next breadcrumb.
I just prefer the wealth of information available for a couple of ounces that a map provides.
Jason of the Woods
08-10-2008, 18:01
No, buy a map or two. Atleast in the begining. You will find much of the trail to be "paved" though and really I think it would be hard to wonder off the path... This is just compared to my average hikes.
Gray Blazer
08-10-2008, 18:01
Bring maps. I just changed my mind after a short section hike last week. There was a trail junction and it was not marked with whiteblazes I could see, but, I saw other clues that looked like other places on the AT (Little trail signs, etc.) and doggoned if I didn't take a wrong turn. I always thought like you do that it would be easy to follow.
Jason of the Woods
08-10-2008, 18:05
Bring maps. I just changed my mind after a short section hike last week. There was a trail junction and it was not marked with whiteblazes I could see, but, I saw other clues that looked like other places on the AT (Little trail signs, etc.) and doggoned if I didn't take a wrong turn. I always thought like you do that it would be easy to follow.
So you had to walk an extra mile? The AT is marked atleast every half a mile with a blaze and in some places much more. As said earlier if anything it's good to have just to have an idea of where you are. After a few days on the trail for me, I just walked. Come to think of it I didn't pay the blazes much mind unless they made a good photo.:D
If you really want to read about this subject try this thread:http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=31410&highlight=map
It's been my experience on this website that folks who ask if a map is necessary usually do not have very good map skills or an understanding of the value of a good map. That might not always be the case, but it is worth noting. BTW, what does "good at knowing my bearings" mean.
superman
08-10-2008, 18:18
I carried maps for sections of the AT but I seldom had to pull one out. The data book gave me most of what I wanted to know (resupply and water). Winter did such a good job navigating that a blind man could hike the AT.:)
papa john
08-10-2008, 18:22
It's up to you if you want to carry a map or not. The one thing that always amazed me were the sudden interest in maps whenever a map carrier pulled one out and opened it up. Like flys the non-map carriers were! Kind of comical really. The maps weren't of much use on the trail really, but if you ever have to get off the trail in an emergency and you are out in the middle of nowhere you have some idea as to the nearest road or other facilities.
warraghiyagey
08-10-2008, 18:23
I've never hiked with anything other than the Data Book. Maps are lots of fun. But not in the least necessary. Follow the White Blazes and enjoy your hike. :sun
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think? I too plan to do a thru-hike , and have read many books about hiking the AT. One author states that the maps are a "must" have, rather than a need to have. I really believe this to be true. I noticed while at Culvers Gap in Stokes State Forest in N.J., (where the trail passes straight thru) it appeared as if the AT emerges from the woods right onto a busy state highway, and one has to walk a ways to pick the AT back up at this point. I could see how it would be possible to easily get lost, make a wrong turn, or worse. I think having the maps simply as a safety measure would make logical sense, I mean a thru-hike is a 14 state adventure, why skimp when it comes to ones personal safety and welfare?
Lone Wolf
08-10-2008, 18:36
I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
i think you're foolish and naive
The name of this site, WhiteBlaze, really describes all the guidance you need ...
I hope you didn't draw that erroneous conclusion from anything I posted! Sometimes the friendly white markers aren't there to guide you when you need them most. It's much easier to lose your way and become disoriented than you may now believe.
Ever tried hiking the A.T. at night when your headlamp's batteries are fading, where there's multiple treadways and the blazing's poor? What happens when a critical blaze on a dead tree blows over in a storm, face-down, the day before you get there? Done much hiking in thick fog, above treeline in wilderness areas where there are few blazes or in fall when leaves obscure the treadway?
I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town.
How do you propose to obtain this information? I presume you intend to bounce ATC's guides from town to town as you hike from box to box and will memorize everything you'll need to know for the next section before you depart.
I've heard of photographic memories:rolleyes: and mnemonics, but, come on, I'm not buying you're going to memorize KTA's maps for Pennsylvania or MATC's maps.
What do you think?
You're being foolish. You asked and I gave my honest opinion.
I had long stretches where I did not carry maps, logistics prevented me from having them. While there were never situations where I thought "if I only had a map", I did feel uncomfortable not having them.
However, my hiking companion would tell you they are not needed and that this site cost him 200 dollars in maps.
The dynamics of hiking duos.
Kirby
canoehead
08-10-2008, 20:05
NOT a wise choice :-?:datz.
Just cuz
Lone Wolf
08-10-2008, 20:06
you can drive a car without insurance but....
Tipi Walter
08-10-2008, 20:09
If your going to be living out of a backpack for 4-6 months w/o a map, how will you know which roads to hitchhike for food, etc? Or what if you decide to do a detour 200 miles on a hitch to see a friend/family?
However, my hiking companion would tell you they [maps] are not needed and that this site cost him 200 dollars in maps.
Kirby
Kirby, there are times you fail to impress me when you might.:(
Sometimes, two hiking together are less apt to get lost than one hiking alone, provided the mapless hiker doesn't get seperated from the other who's carrying his maps for him.
Your hiking companion is incorrect about his assessment concerning the need for maps. He was fortunate. Not everyone has his good fortune although many have 20/20 hindsight.
What he should do is sell his maps to someone who may need them. See, WhiteBlaze didn't cost your friend $200.00. He did, by failing to use WhiteBlaze to help him locate someone who would like to buy his used maps at a discounted price.
workboot
08-10-2008, 20:33
They are kinda like guns better to have one and not need it than need one and not have it.......
Flush2wice
08-10-2008, 20:36
I picked up a thru-hiker who was hitching a ride into Hot Springs. He wasn't carrying maps. He hitched the wrong direction and ended up in Mars Hill where I picked him up. If he had a map he would have known which way to hitch.
shelterbuilder
08-10-2008, 21:03
I would echo the opinions of Bearpaw and Flush2wice - in emergencies and for hitching, it's always nice to know which way is the best way to go. Perhaps Kirby's partner would consider selling you his maps at a reduced price.
Maps weigh little, take up little space, but contain a wealth of information. Take the maps.:clap
the goat
08-10-2008, 21:10
you don't need maps. although i did take some from passing north-bounders and found them useful for finding good blue-blazed trails.
You can probably get away with it. But I don't recommend it personally.
Besides the obvious "What do I do if there's an emergency?" issue, there's a decent amount of convenience and options that disappear without a map. Guidebooks usually list, at most, one road that goes into a town. In many cases, there are 2 or 3 routes that will do so, but you won't know this without a map.
Views mean less to me when I have no frame of reference for them. But when I can sit and orient my map, I know what that little town is, or what that peak is called, and often, "WOW! I just hiked over that?!" or "Man, I'm going to hike over that?!" Maps help me to feel much more a part of the world around me rather than Hansel and Gretl looking for the next breadcrumb.
I just prefer the wealth of information available for a couple of ounces that a map provides.
A very wise post. And one that I suspect makes a "thru" hike more likely. This is a long and difficult trail.
Most who make it to the end need more than the desire to say, "I succeeded." A map with it's knowledge of the surrounding countryside helps. As does a bit of knowledge about that nature one is walking through. Every little bit helps.
I suspect that those who carry maps are twice as likely to reach Katahdin or Springer, as the case may be.
There are a variety of thru hikers. Those who are most likely to walk the distance have a curiosity about the country through which they are traveling. The names of distant mountains, where intersecting roads lead, the towns one sees in the distance. All these things keep the surroundings interesting when one gets bored with the "long green tunnel."
At least that was true for me. I suspect for many others, also.
Weary
WalkingStick75
08-10-2008, 21:34
Maps, being a section hiker I always carried a road map too, cut out section of where I was hiking not the entire state. I wouldn't or couldn't do this for a thru hike but I had an overview of the trail and surrounding roads.
Carry the maps. They are about the lightest piece of gear you can carry that can save your butt, save you time, and make your hike a lot more interesting by helping you discover what's out there besides the next white blaze.
BTW, what does "good at knowing my bearings" mean.
It means he's bound to get lost. :D
That said, I didn't carried maps until northern NE, and only messed up a couple times. It was fun.
What do you think?
Well, if you don't know how to read a map, it won't do you much good. Maybe it's a generational thing. I just got through doing a short hike with my 26 year old nephew. He couldn't read a map to save his butt.
fiddlehead
08-10-2008, 21:44
Data book is all I carry although a compass is more important than a map. (oftentimes i have forgotten which way to go in the morning so need the compass to tell me)
The data book really gives you a lot of info if you read it all properly.
(knowing where all the AYCE are is not something that a map is going to help you with)
I've seen maps (with those exaggerated profiles on them) cause people to have a lot of anxiety about what's coming up and even quit the trail after looking too hard at a profile of an upcoming climb. Sometimes it's better to not know what's coming up. White Blazes are plentiful. (just remember they go both ways and the trail generally is Northeast bound or Southwest bound instead of NOBO or SOBO)
take-a-knee
08-10-2008, 22:21
Just because stupid people have thru-hiked sans maps doesn't me it is a good idea. In fact it is an incredibly stupid idea.
Blissful
08-10-2008, 22:29
To leave out maps because you plan to go ultralight, I think, is foolish. One can still get lost on the AT. It happened to us several times. In fact, if you follow the so called white blazes in PA - there are times the State Game lands, which are also blazed white, look exactly like the trail blazes. There are places too where the trail is not blazed because of being in designated wilderness. I found some dirt road crossings difficult too in finding where the trail is. And one never knows if you wll get hurt (which happens a lot), need sudden supplies, the weather turns bad and you need a bail out trail or road, you need to make camp and want to know the water source, that map could be your saving grace, so to speak.
But as I say - to each his own. It's your hike.
If decide not to take maps, just promise you won't ask to look at the maps of people who brought the non-necessary maps. :)
I've seen maps (with those exaggerated profiles on them) cause people to have a lot of anxiety about what's coming up and even quit the trail after looking too hard at a profile of an upcoming climb. Sometimes it's better to not know what's coming up. White Blazes are plentiful. (just remember they go both ways and the trail generally is Northeast bound or Southwest bound instead of NOBO or SOBO)
I find the profiles useful for estimating the overall effort for a given day's hike -- and for knowing when and where the steepest trail will be. With profiles (for example) I know better than to start a 3000 foot ascent late in the day after having just put in 18 miles. ;)
Blissful
08-10-2008, 22:34
I've seen maps (with those exaggerated profiles on them) cause people to have a lot of anxiety about what's coming up and even quit the trail after looking too hard at a profile of an upcoming climb. Sometimes it's better to not know what's coming up. White Blazes are plentiful. (just remember they go both ways and the trail generally is Northeast bound or Southwest bound instead of NOBO or SOBO)
If people quit the AT because of an anxiety attack at seeing an elevation profile on a map, they shouldn't be out there in the first place. Anyone ought to know before they start that the AT goes up, it goes down and it goes flat. If you don't at least do some homework ahead of time about what you are getting yourself in to, then you will be in for a good surprise, map or not. But I can't see how that is a valid enough excuse to leave a map at home. (!)
I appreciated everyones input, especially those who justified their answers, instead of "screw you take a map" and "maps are for losers!". I guess I'll start out the entire hike with maps in the bottom of my pack and see personally if I need them or not. I guess I'll go through the process of finding reasonably priced maps
And for those who asked what "know my bearings" meant, I'm extremely observant and pretty clever, but I being that you don't know me from Adam... trying to justify replacing a map with "being clever" might sound RIDICULOUS to you, but many of the crutches I see people require in trail life and city life seem ridiculous to me. sometimes paying attention and thinking can get you miles :P
fiddlehead
08-10-2008, 23:40
If people quit the AT because of an anxiety attack at seeing an elevation profile on a map, they shouldn't be out there in the first place. Anyone ought to know before they start that the AT goes up, it goes down and it goes flat. If you don't at least do some homework ahead of time about what you are getting yourself in to, then you will be in for a good surprise, map or not. But I can't see how that is a valid enough excuse to leave a map at home. (!)
The guy i saw go home after staring at his map for hours was in '95 the night before the NOBO climb of Roan Mtn, TN.
I told him to just forget about those topo maps and learn to enjoy the trail the way it comes. He turned around and went home in the morning. Said he'd had enough steep climbs.
I carried maps on my first thru in '77. I discovered that the trail is well marked. Once, (on that first hike) in the Smokies, I followed a white blaze that was wrong. It lead me down a trail that i thought was the AT but wasn't. After studying the map (and thinking i was on the trail) i knew (or thought) if i kept heading north, i would hit the trail again. Got real lost that day. If i wouldn't have had a map, i would've backtracked and found more white blazes.
GPS will replace maps. Relying on a map and hitting fog, a whiteout or triangulating from false peaks can get you in trouble. GPS won't have these problems. They are getting more user friendly and seeing through trees better and better. (triple canopy jungle sometimes here which they won't penetrate yet)
Anyway, it's an old debate and has been discussed so many times on whiteblaze. NO one is changing anyone's mind but technology will move us onward.
Maps can be fun. GPS can be fun. Hiking with neither can be fun (on the AT). Bushwhacking can be fun.
Not sure why i keep giving my opinion on this map issue as i know i'm outnumbered and abuse will follow.
But thinking outside the box has always seemed to be my way. Without it, i wouldn't be hiking here in Phuket as there is no trail and there is no topo maps. Just lots and lots of jungle and mtns and silence and views and i'm the only one up there. (except a few Burmese illegals working the rubber plantations sometimes)
"Believe Nothing, No matter where you read it, or who has said it, even if I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason, and your own common sense!" Buddha
HYOH folks!
Now, I'm going out hiking.
And for those who asked what "know my bearings" meant, I'm extremely observant and pretty clever, but I being that you don't know me from Adam... trying to justify replacing a map with "being clever" might sound RIDICULOUS to you, but many of the crutches I see people require in trail life and city life seem ridiculous to me. sometimes paying attention and thinking can get you miles :P
99.9% of the time, maps aren't "necessary." But it's easy to imagine situations where they might come in very handy. I kinda like knowing where I am... but that's just me. :D
I guess I'll start out the entire hike with maps in the bottom of my pack and see personally if I need them or not.
I expect you will be glad for them at one point or another and there's a chance you may need them at some point. Only when you've finished will you know for sure how important they are to your hike.
You can mail the guide books or maps to yourself and send them home as you require them. You need not start out with all of them, nor are all of them likely to be needed or desirable at any one point in time.
Chances are pretty good you could find a buyer for them afterwards if you don't want to keep them.
I can promise that for the one time you are standing there and have not a clue which way is right, the map will be 100% worth it. It is your American Express card...never leave home without it.
Just because stupid people have thru-hiked sans maps doesn't me it is a good idea. In fact it is an incredibly stupid idea.
Kind of harsh. And since you haven't thru-hiked yet (according to your profile), you have no idea.
Nearly Normal
08-11-2008, 02:23
I just like maps.
They tell a lot and make me want to go there.
On my last trip west, a map inspired me to seek out and explore a park in Idaho called "Craters of the moon". It turned out to be a trip highlight.
If you have ever read anything about the early "Mountain Men", I'm sure this is probably the place where Jim Beckworth dreamed up his yarn of visting hell.
Keep in mind that the maps will lock you into maildrops, which depending on your hiking style could be a real burden. Also remember that the map isn´t a magic carpet, and that if you get hurt hiking alone it will be of very little use - a cellphone would be much, much more useful, but I doubt that much of the map-lobby would be half as zealous about carrying that..
If you get lost, just backtrack! Since you could only ever get lost on another trail in the Appalachians (unless you´re like, drunk, or something), the navigation decision will always be the same, regardless of whether you first consult a map to see just exactly where you´ll backtrack from.
It´s not a big deal. Even the worst case scenario is really, really tame on the AT - hypothermia, as far as I´m concerned. Dying is almost impossible, short of a lightning strike. I just did a summer´s worth of really scary hiking, and it makes this discussion seem overblown. Hiking can´t get more accessible than the AT, and navigation can´t get easier.
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 07:10
I just did a summer´s worth of really scary hiking, and it makes this discussion seem overblown. Hiking can´t get more accessible than the AT, and navigation can´t get easier.
Where'd you hike Clured?
I just got back from about 2 hours in the thick jungle here piecing a few spots together. Didn't know whether to be more scared of the snakes, the big spiders, thick brush with big thorns, or the local farmers (many of whom are illegals from Myramar).
At the end i found myself in the middle of about 15 4-wheelers (tourists/beginners) I think that was the scariest part.
Maps? yeah right! Maybe i'll make one someday of the trails here but i doubt you'd find a Thai who could read it.
deleted initial post, insufficient knowledge of whether or not maps are necessary on a AT thru hike. Only familiar with the northernmost states.
If you get lost, just backtrack!
Not quite.... :rolleyes: If you know your way enough to backtrack, you're not lost -- just on the wrong path.
superman
08-11-2008, 08:09
I hiked with a guy who had to know where he was all the time. He carried a GPS, oriented it to north and could follow our progress as we hiked. It was irritating to me but it gave him comfort. When I was in Vietnam, it was not uncommon for units to be lost or "out of position." Those were life or death issues back then. The AT is one of the best-marked, most accessible trails in the world. Many people hike the whole thing with no maps and no consequences. Others have to do some back tracking to get back on the trail. I haven't heard of a lot of AT hikers who were lost and never returned. On the other hand, there is no insurance policy against stupid or just bad choices. It wouldn't hurt to start with a map and see how you feel about it. HYOH
Plodderman
08-11-2008, 08:10
Maps are fun to have on the AT but I never leave home without the Data book. Maps on the trail are not necessary but the Data books are very helpful.
take-a-knee
08-11-2008, 08:52
Kind of harsh. And since you haven't thru-hiked yet (according to your profile), you have no idea.
I've only hiked a couple hundred AT miles so far, but I've been reading maps for thirty years, and teaching people to read maps on several continents. My comments on this topic are at least as valid as anything you have to say on the matter.
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 09:05
Wow! Take it easy now.
You are talking about someone that has made hiking his living for at least the past 14 years that i have known him and he has done a ton of hiking in that time.
JUst because you teach people how to read a map doesn't mean you know if they are necessary on the AT or not.
If i understand correctly, this is a "Thru-hiking" specific forum.
I think you are a great map reader. (and probably teacher) However, don't you think you should thru-hike before giving advice on whether they are needed for a successful thru or not?
Most likely, Sly has hiked with and without them and can relate to the difference for a thru.
I believe that you only know the answer to the question when you have done it both ways and then compare.
Or at least consider the opposite or 180deg view with an open mind.
Calling people with that experience stupid is not sound advice IMO.
take-a-knee
08-11-2008, 09:23
Wow! Take it easy now.
You are talking about someone that has made hiking his living for at least the past 14 years that i have known him and he has done a ton of hiking in that time.
JUst because you teach people how to read a map doesn't mean you know if they are necessary on the AT or not.
If i understand correctly, this is a "Thru-hiking" specific forum.
I think you are a great map reader. (and probably teacher) However, don't you think you should thru-hike before giving advice on whether they are needed for a successful thru or not?
Most likely, Sly has hiked with and without them and can relate to the difference for a thru.
I believe that you only know the answer to the question when you have done it both ways and then compare.
Or at least consider the opposite or 180deg view with an open mind.
Calling people with that experience stupid is not sound advice IMO.
Like I've said in other posts, I know people who've bailed out of airplanes with and without reserve parachutes. I don't need to do the latter to know it ain't too smart. As for an "open mind", GK Chesterton said that the purpose of an open mind was the same as that of an open mouth, that is, to close upon something solid.
Alligator
08-11-2008, 09:48
...I guess I'll start out the entire hike with maps in the bottom of my pack and see personally if I need them or not. ...If you bury your maps at the bottom of your pack, you are reinforcing that you won't use them. Maps are flat, keep them somewhere accessible.
Alligator
08-11-2008, 09:57
Also, keep the name-calling out of the discussion people.
Like I've said in other posts, I know people who've bailed out of airplanes with...
I've done Kamikaze shots in my bar hopping days...
It's hard to argue that maps are needed in daily navigation on the AT, especially if you have already thru-hiked. Maybe it is the boyscout in me, or the blueblaze mentality, but sometimes things happen or plans change or you need water and there is nothing like a good map to help you out of a situation. Additionally, maps do help you experience more than just the next white blaze. Maps are fun to me and invaluable when stuff happens.
I guess it has all been said many times before. Heck, I am thinking about starting a dumb flashlight thread... I keep mine in my pack at night, so I can see and experience the woods, not just the next step in front of me, unless I start tripping on too many roots or rocks or wake-up in a tree-top after walking over the edge.
Like I've said in other posts, I know people who've bailed out of airplanes with and without reserve parachutes.
Which has nothing to do with thru-hiking the AT.
The Old Fhart
08-11-2008, 10:16
Take-a-knee -"Like I've said in other posts, I know people who've bailed out of airplanes with and without reserve parachutes."
Sly-"Which has nothing to do with thru-hiking the AT."What about "JumpStart" who parachuted onto Springer to start his thru hike about 1986?:D
As long as you stay on the trail, follow the white blazes and don't get lost, no maps are needed. I carried maps only for a few hundred miles. Even in the 100 mile wilderness I had no maps. I did have the data book, the hand book, and a compass. I used the compass just for fun. Though if you get lost in a white out in the Whites or on a southern Bald a compass could be a necessity.
David
For myself personally, and only for the Appalachian Trail, I don't feel that maps are needed. The trail is very well marked, and at most there is minor inconvenience if some backtracking is needed to get back to the trail. As for emergencies, the AT crosses a road every few miles, which the Data Book lists almost all of them. It's easy enough to find a fast way out using the AT.
Also, I'm very comfortable in the woods, and have no problem on the AT taking the very minor risk of not carrying the maps.
On other trails however, I will usually carry maps, especially if it's an area I'm unfamiliar with. The PCT for example I almost always carried maps, the only time I didn't was a stretch when I missed my maildrop. At the time I was hiking with others, and they were kind enough to not intentionally ditch me in the wilds of CA. Two weekends ago I did a stretch in Harriman where we used multiple trails, and the maps were very very useful.
But that's just me.
Aside from occasionally providing useful information for navigating the trail, maps make the trail more interesting by identifying your surroundings. Most people quit the trail because they find it boring -- though some will use the excuse of "injuries," rather than boredom.
But those with a lively curiosity about the trail will be less bored and more likely to get to Katahdin, or Springer, I suspect. Therefore, I strongly recommend you carry maps -- and also a nature guide or two.
Weary
Jim Adams
08-11-2008, 10:58
2 thru hikes....no maps...
...but they do make great fire starters!
geek
Well said Ender.
Another thing is even maps can give a false sense of security, on the AT, that could lead to disaster. For instance, if one were to get hurt and tried to bushwhack to the nearest road rather than staying on the trail to the nearest road, identified by the databook, or one of the guidebooks, and couldn't make it out, they may never be found.
the goat
08-11-2008, 11:06
Just because stupid people have thru-hiked sans maps doesn't me it is a good idea. In fact it is an incredibly stupid idea.
lol!
i've hiked the a.t. twice w/o maps and lived to tell about it!
they are truely not needed, just a nice accompaniment, if you have the money.
Well said Ender.
Another thing is even maps can give a false sense of security, on the AT, that could lead to disaster. For instance, if one were to get hurt and tried to bushwhack to the nearest road rather than staying on the trail to the nearest road, identified by the databook, or one of the guidebooks, and couldn't make it out, they may never be found.
Bushwhacking is not what I had in mind when I recommended them for safety. Maps do indicate other trails and can show you where roads lead, some lead you further away from civilization.
Common sense is your best safety asset anyway. Barring the severest of injuries, keep your head and you will be fine, maps or no maps.
The data book raises an interesting point. Integrating maps as a backgound to the data might prove to be the best of both worlds.
I wasn't speaking to you directly about bushwhacking off trail but, it does come up. Also, the Companion includes side trails and where they lead.
But yes, maps have more info than not having maps. :p
Bushwhacking is not what I had in mind when I recommended them for safety. Maps do indicate other trails and can show you where roads lead, some lead you further away from civilization.
Common sense is your best safety asset anyway. Barring the severest of injuries, keep your head and you will be fine, maps or no maps.
The data book raises an interesting point. Integrating maps as a backgound to the data might prove to be the best of both worlds.
Here's a new book for the PCT. Not perfect (the elevation profiles don't always show the height of land, etc) but close.
http://www.pctatlas.com/
Edit I've attached a free chapter in pdf.
I wasn't speaking to you directly about bushwhacking off trail but, it does come up. Also, the Companion includes side trails and where they lead.
But yes, maps have more info than not having maps. :p
Bushwhacking can be fun though. I did 4 miles in the dacks once to create a loop hike, where none existed. Map and compass and undisturbed woods really test your skills. A GPS could not have put us closer to where we wanted to come out. Sweet feeling after all the hard work to get there.
superman
08-11-2008, 11:24
Well said Ender.
Another thing is even maps can give a false sense of security, on the AT, that could lead to disaster. For instance, if one were to get hurt and tried to bushwhack to the nearest road rather than staying on the trail to the nearest road, identified by the databook, or one of the guidebooks, and couldn't make it out, they may never be found.
When I started the AT in 2000 there were two days of rain and it dropped to damn cold. There was a clump of people looking at maps trying to figure out how to bushwhack to civilization. They didn't care about waiting for a road crossing. They didn't know whether to poo or go blind. I told them to start a fire, warm up and relax as I hiked on. I never heard of a clump of lost, dead, confused thru hikers so I guess they survived.
Bushwhacking can be fun though. I did 4 miles in the dacks once to create a loop hike, where none existed. Map and compass and undisturbed woods really test your skills. A GPS could not have put us closer to where we wanted to come out. Sweet feeling after all the hard work to get there.
Bushwhacking can be a blast but, I wouldn't recommend it being alone and injured on the AT. There's just too many road crossings to take the chance..
I strongly recommend you carry maps -- and also a nature guide or two.
Weary
While one or more nature guide(s) might add something desirable to an A.T. hike for some, I'm doubtful you'll sell anyone on carrying them who can't also be sold on carrying maps.
My advice would be to obtain good photographs and identify what was observed afield once home. Today there are many excellent online references with more coming online all the time.
Someone should start a thread linking some of the better online references and rework the thread into an article.
minnesotasmith
08-11-2008, 11:39
What about "JumpStart" who parachuted onto Springer to start his thru hike about 1986?:D
Always figured he "air-blazed" the trail section between Amicalola and Springer. ;)
Bushwhacking can be a blast but, I wouldn't recommend it being alone and injured on the AT. There's just too many road crossings to take the chance..
Yep. I do not promote, nor would I attempt bushwhacking in an emergency situation.
Solid orienteering training is a prerequisite to a safe bushwhack.
Footslogger
08-11-2008, 12:16
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
================================
Maps are not critical WHILE you're hiking. Maps could become critical if your hike goes sour and you need to bail.
The trail is well blazed and having the maps to guide your hike is more of "convenience" informational resource along the way. But if you need to find a road or you need to know the elevation changes in an area (along side the trail) the maps become a necessity.
'Slogger
Tipi Walter
08-11-2008, 12:27
Let's face it, anyone doing some serious bushwacking off the AT would be smart to take the pertinent 1:24000 scale USGS topographic maps. Problem is, one of these maps can be covered on foot in one or two days, so they are not relevant to hiking the AT. But if you really want to know a place and spend some time exploring, these maps are the best.
take-a-knee
08-11-2008, 12:44
2 thru hikes....no maps...
...but they do make great fire starters!
geek
I feel like the dealer (Billy Bob Thornton) in the movie Tombstone.
"I feel like I'm playing cards with my brother's kids"
This no map thing rears it's ignorant head here quite often I've noticed. In a couple of other similar threads folks with SAR experience saw fit to address this ignorance. I guess they've tired of head-banging the wall, I know I have.
the goat
08-11-2008, 12:48
I feel like the dealer (Billy Bob Thornton) in the movie Tombstone.
"I feel like I'm playing cards with my brother's kids"
'member what happened to old billy bob shortly after he uttered that line?:D
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 12:50
Nobody seems to be mentioning the fact that the ATC maps that (I believe) most carry don't show much outside of the AT corridor.
From what i remember, they show a few miles on either side of the trail and that's about it.
If you really want to carry something for bailing, the Delorme Gazetteer would be a much better map to carry.
I saw people even using state road maps already. Really can't blame their logic as the AT itself is well marked.
Maps may be necessary if you have problems and have to get out to the nearest road, to get to a hospital or somthing. I don't see the ATC maps helping much to do this.
I bought the Delorme Gazetteers for the 3 states when i did the PCT and they came in very handy sometimes. also, i bought the 4 for the CDT and also, very handy. They are still in my map collection which is going to be making it's 5th CDT hike this coming year i believe.
Of course you'd have to buy 12 of them (I wouldn't bother with WV or MD) and they aren't cheap aye?
The newest NY/NJ maps looks more like a road map with a trail going through it than a trail map with some road intersections. Not sure I like that versus more trail details. But this section is pretty simple compared to other states.
So TAK, rather than calling everyone that doesn't take them, stupid, what are your sound reasoning's for taking maps on an AT thru-hike?
I feel like the dealer (Billy Bob Thornton) in the movie Tombstone.
"I feel like I'm playing cards with my brother's kids"
This no map thing rears it's ignorant head here quite often I've noticed. In a couple of other similar threads folks with SAR experience saw fit to address this ignorance. I guess they've tired of head-banging the wall, I know I have.
the goat
08-11-2008, 13:05
So TAK, rather than calling everyone that doesn't take them, stupid, what are your sound reasoning's for taking maps on an AT thru-hike?
yes. i too would like to know why they are absolutely necessary.
Of course you'd have to buy 12 of them (I wouldn't bother with WV or MD) and they aren't cheap aye?
There aren't separate guides for WV and MD. The complete set of guides can often be purchased directly from ATC at a discount late in the calendar year. Information about the guide books available on ATC's A.T. Guidebooks and Maps (http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.786995/k.C95F/Guidebooks_and_Maps.htm) page.
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 13:09
Minds are like parachutes, they only function when open!
There aren't separate guides for WV and MD. The complete set of guides can often be purchased directly from ATC at a discount late in the calendar year. Information about the guide books available on ATC's A.T. Guidebooks and Maps (http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.786995/k.C95F/Guidebooks_and_Maps.htm) page.
Fiddlehead is talking about the Delorme Gazetteers for the best approach of laterally getting off trail to seek help in case of emergency.
PS Fiddlehead, love the quote!
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 13:12
There aren't separate guides for WV and MD. The complete set of guides can often be purchased directly from ATC at a discount late in the calendar year. Information about the guide books available on ATC's A.T. Guidebooks and Maps (http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.786995/k.C95F/Guidebooks_and_Maps.htm) page.
I checked but didn't see the DeLorme Gazetteers on their website. Only the ATC Guidebooks and maps.
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 13:17
Thanks Sly. I use that one on the Phuket forum here. (gotta keep them Germans in line somtimes)
I'd take it a little easier on the guy if he'd stop calling me stupid.
Jeez he probably gets his topos out to drive to the shootin range
Minds are like parachutes, they only function when open!
Ironic that TAK always points out how many times he's jumped.
The one thing that always amazed me were the sudden interest in maps whenever a map carrier pulled one out and opened it up. Like flys the non-map carriers were! Kind of comical really.This is my observation, too.
Yeah, and 99.9% of the time a map carrier pulled one out it was completely unnecessary.
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 13:25
I'm goin to bed. I'm getting nothing done lately with my work cause whiteblaze is too exciting. But tomorrow morning i'm going hiking to show our drummer the trail i've been working on. (I have now hiked about 8 miles which took me 7 days)
Anyway, just to keep it on topic, i'll try to map it out for the next guy.
Lone Wolf
08-11-2008, 13:25
Yeah, and 99.9% of the time a map carrier pulled one out it was completely unnecessary.
same with water filter carriers
Truly, this site was more interesting and more informative when the bozos and flamers were running amok than now with the know-it-alls calling those who disagree with their hiking methods "stupid".
The logic of needing a map in an emergency doesn't make any sense. If you are too hurt to move a map will be of no help. If you can move, you can hike the AT. The number of spots and the number of miles you might cut off by taking an unmarked blue-blaze to a road are so insignificant in number that a cost/benefit analysis of carrying maps the entire way could certainly fall in favor of not carrying maps.
Or maybe, only carry maps in certain spots. What the hell do you need a map for on the BRP or in the Shenandoahs? Or anywhere from WV to MA where you cross a road nearly every 3-5 miles?
Some may take maps, others may not. Neither is determinative of who is or isn't "stupid". But I think we all can tell who amongst us is just plain rude and ignorant. And if there is any doubt, it is you Take-a-knee. In the future, refrain from calling others "stupid".
And mods, if you want to see things get out of hand, let "stupid" comments fly. In my experience, nothing will set a person off more than calling them "stupid". It is uncalled for, unncessary and just plain ignorant.
Nobody seems to be mentioning the fact that the ATC maps that (I believe) most carry don't show much outside of the AT corridor.
From what i remember, they show a few miles on either side of the trail and that's about it. They show enough. When I needed to bail south of Bemis Mtn, they showed me that the side trail I was considering was actually longer than the AT to the next road.
I assume the comments about gazetteers was an attempt at sarcasm? You weren't serious, were you?
If you were serious, consider a mapping GPS, like the Garmin60. For 8 or 9 ounces you have more maps at your disposal hike than all the Gazetteers.
Lone Wolf
08-11-2008, 13:28
Truly, this site was more interesting and more informative when the bozos and flamers were running amok than now with the know-it-alls calling those who disagree with their hiking methods "stupid".
The logic of needing a map in an emergency doesn't make any sense. If you are too hurt to move a map will be of no help. If you can move, you can hike the AT. The number of spots and the number of miles you might cut off by taking an unmarked blue-blaze to a road are so insignificant in number that a cost/benefit analysis of carrying maps the entire way could certainly fall in favor of not carrying maps.
Or maybe, only carry maps in certain spots. What the hell do you need a map for on the BRP or in the Shenandoahs? Or anywhere from WV to MA where you cross a road nearly every 3-5 miles?
Some may take maps, others may not. Neither is determinative of who is or isn't "stupid". But I think we all can tell who amongst us is just plain rude and ignorant. And if there is any doubt, it is you Take-a-knee. In the future, refrain from calling others "stupid".
And mods, if you want to see things get out of hand, let "stupid" comments fly. In my experience, nothing will set a person off more than calling them "stupid". It is uncalled for, unncessary and just plain ignorant.
report the post. easy to do
The logic of needing a map in an emergency doesn't make any sense. If you are too hurt to move a map will be of no help. If you can move, you can hike the AT. The number of spots and the number of miles you might cut off by taking an unmarked blue-blaze to a road are so insignificant in number that a cost/benefit analysis of carrying maps the entire way could certainly fall in favor of not carrying maps.Disagree strongly here. There is a wide range of injuries between being hurt so badly you are immobile and being unhurt.
The difference of a few miles is huge if you have broken a leg or foot, if you have been bitten by an animal you fear might be rabid, if you have an injury that permits walking but is extremely painful, if you have just suffered a heart attack or any injury where time to treatment is important, etc etc etc.
Also disagree with your statement that there are few side trails off the AT. THere are many - if you had a map, you would know this :D
There is also the case of bad weather above treeline, especially in shoulder seasons.
Maps for bailout are like car insurance, as someone said. Something you have that you hope you never need. Or life insurance, for that matter.
Alligator
08-11-2008, 13:45
It's just a piece of paper. Chill out people:p.
Fiddlehead is talking about the Delorme Gazetteers for the best approach of laterally getting off trail to seek help in case of emergency.
I checked [SOG's ATC link] but didn't see the DeLorme Gazetteers on their website. Only the ATC Guidebooks and maps.
OK, I re-read fiddlehead's post and now understand why his total number of guides didn't match the number I expected!:rolleyes: Still, my link is of use to readers who desire to learn more about ATC's guidebooks and may want to purchase one or more of them.
I don't post strictly and at times not even primarily for the benefit of members participating in threads. After all, it's often those not posting who stand to benefit most from what's posted.
It's just a piece of paper. Chill out people:p.
Just a piece of paper? I can guess what side of the debate you're on! ;)
Just a piece of paper? I can guess what side of the debate you're on! ;)
Paper can come in handy...
Alligator
08-11-2008, 13:59
Just a piece of paper? I can guess what side of the debate you're on! ;)Sshhh, I'm a map advocate really. But all this has been covered and usually ends up with people arguing.
jersey joe
08-11-2008, 14:04
You don't need to carry a map, just carry one of those reliable "SPOT" devices in case of emergency!!!
You don't need to carry a map, just carry one of those reliable "SPOT" devices in case of emergency!!!
Ooh....in light of how well that has been working...that's good. Too funny... :D
Wonder if SPOT will sponsor WB hikers? ;)
minnesotasmith
08-11-2008, 15:04
Fiddlehead is talking about the Delorme Gazetteers for the best approach of laterally getting off trail to seek help in case of emergency.
PS Fiddlehead, love the quote!
The resolution in them is really low compared with the quadrangle maps they're based upon. If you really care about a particular section (is near your home, say), I'd spring for the 8 bucks or whatever and get a quad map from your state geological survey.
Rockhound
08-11-2008, 15:16
the pot stirrers are going to give you a lot of crap for hiking without maps. Let it roll off your back. Any of the guidebooks are sufficient. CDT, PCT, yes you will need maps. The AT has whiteblazes every quarter mile or so, trail towns every 30 miles or so. Maps are not needed unless you run out of T.P.. So pot stirrers, (you know who you are) direct your venom at me. I have thick skin and can take it. I find it a little humorous watching hikers spend 2 hours every night and an hour every morning pouring over their maps and then 15 to 20 miles later winding up at the same shelter/campsite as mapless me. On the other hand, if you want to do some blueblazing in the Smokies, Whites etc... carry those maps.
Ah heck, if you get lost and have no map, just pull out your cell phone and dial 911, thats what most lost mapless hikers do :rolleyes::D.
the pot stirrers are going to give you a lot of crap for hiking without maps. Let it roll off your back.
Fwiw567
I guess I'll start out the entire hike with maps in the bottom of my pack and see personally if I need them or not.
Disagree strongly here. There is a wide range of injuries between being hurt so badly you are immobile and being unhurt.
The difference of a few miles is huge if you have broken a leg or foot, if you have been bitten by an animal you fear might be rabid, if you have an injury that permits walking but is extremely painful, if you have just suffered a heart attack or any injury where time to treatment is important, etc etc etc.
Also disagree with your statement that there are few side trails off the AT. THere are many - if you had a map, you would know this :D
There is also the case of bad weather above treeline, especially in shoulder seasons.
Maps for bailout are like car insurance, as someone said. Something you have that you hope you never need. Or life insurance, for that matter.
Maps are definitely insurance. Not disputing that. Hell, I love looking at 'em and devising blue-blazes. It's kinda like reading the newspaper or something akin to information gathering.
I mentioned unmarked blueblazed trails. In my experience, many blue blaze trails will list destination and mileage similar to AT signs. Also, we all hike in context. We know what roads we crossed and how long ago. We know which direction the trail leads. We know what elevation we are at. We know landmarks (rivers, towns, other mts) that lie in the several directions. All of this information taken together can lead a reasonable hiker to the make the correct choice on whether or no.
All this said, I have never heard of a story of a hiker whose injury was compounded by lack of a map. If anyone has one a story illustrating this point, I would love to hear it. Like most threads, this seems more value-based than practical. Some people are just more risk averse than others.
And as another poster so coyly pointed out, if you are injured, just use your cellphone. Having one of those would seem to be the best insurance of all.
Headed to the Wilderness this weekend, sans maps, pray for me.http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif
And as another poster so coyly pointed out, if you are injured, just use your cellphone. Having one of those would seem to be the best insurance of all.
Not for nothing, if you make the emergency cell call, where do you tell them to find you if you don't have a map?
The Old Fhart
08-11-2008, 16:18
Yahtzee-"...All this said, I have never heard of a story of a hiker whose injury was compounded by lack of a map. If anyone has one a story illustrating this point, I would love to hear it."One everyone knows about:
"In July, after living in the bus for several months, he decided to leave, but found the trail back blocked by the Teklanika River, which was then considerably higher and swifter than when he crossed in April. There was a hand-operated tram that crossed the river 1/4 of a mile away from where he fell in. Unfortunately, McCandless was unaware of this because the only navigational aid in his possession was a tattered road map he had found at a gas station, which did not contain the type of detailed topographical information that could easily have saved his life."
The Solemates
08-11-2008, 16:18
what is TOS#2?
Alligator
08-11-2008, 16:21
what is TOS#2?Terms of Service=User Agreement.
what is TOS#2?
2. Offensive posting is not allowed. That includes use of illegal substances, racism, sexism, or posts that ridicule, belittle, taunt, mock, or assault the character of other members. Our policy does not protect people that choose to verbally assault other members that may disagree with them. In essence members can disagree but should remain respectful of the person they disagree with.
Not for nothing, if you make the emergency cell call, where do you tell them to find you if you don't have a map?
With dead reckoning and a data/guidebook you can figure out where you are. Now if you go off trail, and try to do that, even with a map, good luck.
leeki pole
08-11-2008, 16:32
Not for nothing, if you make the emergency cell call, where do you tell them to find you if you don't have a map?
"I'm out here on the Trail somewhere, can you triangulate my position please? And I've got dinner and hotel reservations in (name your town) so make it snappy."
With dead reckoning and a data/guidebook you can figure out where you are. Now if you go off trail, and try to do that, even with a map, good luck.
I can see that. I am pretty, um, exacting on knowing where I am on the map at all times, so even if I should wonder off trail, I would be able to give a very close approximation of where to look.
Not for nothing, if you make the emergency cell call, where do you tell them to find you if you don't have a map?
On the Appalachian Trail, however many miles you have hiked since you last crossed a road or the however many miles til the next road as stated in your data book.
And as for the McCandless reference, he wasn't a hiker nor was he on the AT. The point being made isn't to never carry a map anywhere, it is that for some a map on the AT is not a necessity.
So I'll rephrase and be more specific. Can anyone tell me of one injured hiker on the AT whose injury was compounded by not having a map? I'm not saying it has never happened, I'm just interested if anyone has ever heard of such an unlikely occurence.
Point of clarification: I don't carry a data book. Maps are much lighter. Sometimes I print the pages out of the handbook for the section I am doing, but mostlyIuse that as a fire-starter. :)
I can see that. I am pretty, um, exacting on knowing where I am on the map at all times, so even if I should wonder off trail, I would be able to give a very close approximation of where to look.
Sure you may know where you are off trail but try telling that to SAR! However, if you stay on trail it's, "I'm 9 miles north of PA 850*"
* special points if you can tell me where I'll be waiting. ;)
Alligator
08-11-2008, 17:03
On the Appalachian Trail, however many miles you have hiked since you last crossed a road or the however many miles til the next road as stated in your data book.
And as for the McCandless reference, he wasn't a hiker nor was he on the AT. The point being made isn't to never carry a map anywhere, it is that for some a map on the AT is not a necessity.
So I'll rephrase and be more specific. Can anyone tell me of one injured hiker on the AT whose injury was compounded by not having a map? I'm not saying it has never happened, I'm just interested if anyone has ever heard of such an unlikely occurence.I had injuries that could well have been compounded by not having a map. I had silver dollar (old silver dollar) sized blisters on my heels. I had used every last band-aid we had over the course of several days. I had also inflamed my knee by walking stiff-gaited. We were in Maine, I believe the shelter was West Carry Pond (I'd have to look it up though). Using the maps, we were able to determine I could walk to a specific logging road, and that once my friends crossed the Kennebec, they could come back and get me.
As it turned out, once I got to the logging road, I managed a hitch. I wouldn't have walked there if I didn't know how far it was, and I really don't know what would have happened if I had stayed there. It would have been a longer extraction for sure, as I had to wait on my friends to cross the Kennebec, which would have been the next day.
My blisters were pretty tore up and I had an infection that could have gotten worse. I ended up going to the emergency room.
That doesn't exactly answer your question Yahtzee, but given my foot was infected, it could have gotten worse over the next 24-48 hrs.
Sure you may know where you are off trail but try telling that to SAR! However, if you stay on trail it's, "I'm 9 miles north of PA 850*"
* special points if you can tell me where I'll be waiting. ;)
So, I will get someone else to pick me up and take me to the bar so I can buy you a cold one for waiting patiently for me. :D
So, I will get someone else to pick me up and take me to the bar so I can buy you a cold one for waiting patiently for me. :D
For guessing correctly, I'll buy first round!
For guessing correctly, I'll buy first round!
Your on! And I will be sure to remind you of that promise some day... even if I forget what it was about. :cool:
the pot stirrers are going to give you a lot of crap for hiking without maps.
Mmm...mmm..mmm pot stirring...
http://a377.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/21/s_93ce3c06ac17d5c482ee6ef5fdd710e8.gif
Is it soup yet !?!!?
A personal favorite..Grandma Mags made something like this in winter growing up..
http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/recipes/sidedish/greensandbeans.html
Mmm...mmm..mmm pot stirring...
http://a377.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/21/s_93ce3c06ac17d5c482ee6ef5fdd710e8.gif
Is it soup yet !?!!?
It will be soup when all the non-map carriers pledge not to ask to take a peek at my map. No maps for you! ;)
The Old Fhart
08-11-2008, 17:28
Yahtzee -"And as for the McCandless reference, he wasn't a hiker nor was he on the AT. The point being made isn't to never carry a map anywhere, it is that for some a map on the AT is not a necessity.
So I'll rephrase and be more specific. Can anyone tell me of one injured hiker on the AT whose injury was compounded by not having a map? I'm not saying it has never happened, I'm just interested if anyone has ever heard of such an unlikely occurence."You can rephrase and be so specific that you will rule out everyone who is left-handed and hiking SOBO but the fact is, Alexander Supertramp did not drive to where he had a problem, he hiked there and a map would have saved him.
There is never any situation where having more knowledge is going to complicate matters, indeed the opposite is true. I've run in to thru hikers on side trails in the Whites on several occasions that have no idea where they are but keep hiking until they hit a road to thumb back to the nearest trail crossing, after they ask me where it is. They always mutter somthing about the trail needing blazes but never blame themselves for being so ill-prepared.
In another of these map threads I mentioned a hiker who had tried to jump across a brook, slipped, knocked himself out and was hypothermic in the brook when he was found. Fortunately the rescuers knew there was a dirt road 100+ yards to the left of the trail instead of having to litter this person a couple of miles to the nearest road crossing. This was on the A.T. south of Sunrise Mountain, BTW; and the injured person was a hiker. I arrived just as they were littering him to the nearby road and talked to some of the SAR folks cleaning up.
leeki pole
08-11-2008, 17:30
I remember back to when I ran the New York City Marathon, knowing that it was impractical to carry a map, but I studied the route extensively beforehand. It is so much more enjoyable to experience a run or hike, IMHO, rather than just complete it. I didn't want to miss anything memorable, knowing I might never go back. I think a hike is exactly that, recognizing sites that could go unnoticed if you didn't have a map or at least, a good data book. So many hikers, at least from what I can tell, blitz through their hike, missing great side trails (Gulf Hagas comes to mind) and shortchange themselves in the process. And studying a map the night before in your tent before your next day's journey is, to me, some of the best part of any hike. Wow, I'm going to see that tomorrow. Cool.
You can rephrase and be so specific that you will rule out everyone who is left-handed and hiking SOBO but the fact is, Alexander Supertramp did not drive to where he had a problem, he hiked there and a map would have saved him.
There is never any situation where having more knowledge is going to complicate matters, indeed the opposite is true. I've run in to thru hikers on side trails in the Whites on several occasions that have no idea where they are but keep hiking until they hit a road to thumb back to the nearest trail crossing, after they ask me where it is. They always mutter somthing about the trail needing blazes but never blame themselves for being so ill-prepared.
In another of these map threads I mentioned a hiker who had tried to jump across a brook, slipped, knocked himself out and was hypothermic in the brook when he was found. Fortunately the rescuers knew there was a dirt road 100+ yards to the left of the trail instead of having to litter this person a couple of miles to the nearest road crossing. This was on the A.T. south of Sunrise Mountain, BTW; and the injured person was a hiker. I arrived just as they were littering him to the nearby road and talked to some of the SAR folks cleaning up.
Nice try, Old Man. This is an AT specific site. Didn't think I had to spell out that I was talking about the AT since the entire thread up that point was about AT hiking. I'm on an AT site no need to narrow it down. You need to stay on point and not expand the topic so you can score some.
Um, what do rescuers familiar with the area have to do with hikers carrying maps? Nowhere's in that tale of the hypothermic brook jumper do I read anything about maps. But hey, why let facts get in the way of a little self-righteous curmdugerry.
I had injuries that could well have been compounded by not having a map. I had silver dollar (old silver dollar) sized blisters on my heels. I had used every last band-aid we had over the course of several days. I had also inflamed my knee by walking stiff-gaited. We were in Maine, I believe the shelter was West Carry Pond (I'd have to look it up though). Using the maps, we were able to determine I could walk to a specific logging road, and that once my friends crossed the Kennebec, they could come back and get me.
As it turned out, once I got to the logging road, I managed a hitch. I wouldn't have walked there if I didn't know how far it was, and I really don't know what would have happened if I had stayed there. It would have been a longer extraction for sure, as I had to wait on my friends to cross the Kennebec, which would have been the next day.
My blisters were pretty tore up and I had an infection that could have gotten worse. I ended up going to the emergency room.
That doesn't exactly answer your question Yahtzee, but given my foot was infected, it could have gotten worse over the next 24-48 hrs.
No, this is what I was looking for. Thank you. Glad you had a map and I am glad that it helped you.
It's a cost/benefit analysis we all must do. No one way is right or wrong.
Happy Hiking.
IF you want a chance at a 400# bear pic....no map.
Skidsteer
08-11-2008, 18:55
IF you want a chance at a 400# bear pic....no map.
Good point.
Maps scare the hell out of bears.
Good point.
Maps scare the hell out of bears.
Oh, I thought the clueless hiker couldn't get the bear's picture when he is asking him to point to his location on the map.
IF you want a chance at a 400# bear pic....no map.
Call me crazy, but I think I know the cryptic message here.:sun
ed ..All for maps on the A.T.
If no map you can be in Big trouble.:)
fiddlehead
08-11-2008, 21:04
.
I assume the comments about gazetteers was an attempt at sarcasm? You weren't serious, were you?
I was serious. I did carry them for PCT and CDT. I haven't carried them on the AT but am serious that they would help for blue blazing or bailing out to the nearest town.
I only carry the data book (my last 3 1/2 thru-hikes anyway) on the AT.
Most arguments about the maps will not work because of the narrow ATC maps. THe gazeteer maps would be a much better option for these situations (bailing out, emergencys)
The Gazeteers even have GPS ticks on them so you can somewhat pinpoint your location on a 911 call. I don't believe the ATC maps do although maybe the latest versions do. I don't know about that but it would be a good idea for them to put them on there.
But yes, Frosty, i was totally serious. And I did see a guy hiking in '77 using ONLY the state hiway maps. I guess it got me to thinking outside the box way back then.
One more comment here this morning before i go out hiking: I wonder what the OP is thinking about what the heck he started here.
Delorme Gazateer, thats all I've ever used hiking in Maine, tear out a couple/four pages of the retired edition and you're good to go. 2 pages will get me from Monson to the Bigelows. I've been know to use state road maps too. Whatever floats your boat though.
dessertrat
08-12-2008, 09:25
You can probably get away with it. But I don't recommend it personally.
Besides the obvious "What do I do if there's an emergency?" issue, there's a decent amount of convenience and options that disappear without a map. Guidebooks usually list, at most, one road that goes into a town. In many cases, there are 2 or 3 routes that will do so, but you won't know this without a map.
Views mean less to me when I have no frame of reference for them. But when I can sit and orient my map, I know what that little town is, or what that peak is called, and often, "WOW! I just hiked over that?!" or "Man, I'm going to hike over that?!" Maps help me to feel much more a part of the world around me rather than Hansel and Gretl looking for the next breadcrumb.
I just prefer the wealth of information available for a couple of ounces that a map provides.
Well put. Plus 1 on that. The only problem is the mail drops to get new maps, and how often to do those.
Nearly Normal
08-13-2008, 13:13
Blue blazers see it mo betta.
Blue blazers see it mo betta.
Yes, blue blazers and bushwackers in which case maps are recommended.
OregonHiker
08-13-2008, 19:50
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
Whatever you decide, you'll have a good time I'm sure
You can rephrase and be so specific that you will rule out everyone who is left-handed and hiking SOBO but the fact is, Alexander Supertramp did not drive to where he had a problem, he hiked there and a map would have saved him.
There is never any situation where having more knowledge is going to complicate matters, indeed the opposite is true. I've run in to thru hikers on side trails in the Whites on several occasions that have no idea where they are but keep hiking until they hit a road to thumb back to the nearest trail crossing, after they ask me where it is. They always mutter somthing about the trail needing blazes but never blame themselves for being so ill-prepared.
In another of these map threads I mentioned a hiker who had tried to jump across a brook, slipped, knocked himself out and was hypothermic in the brook when he was found. Fortunately the rescuers knew there was a dirt road 100+ yards to the left of the trail instead of having to litter this person a couple of miles to the nearest road crossing. This was on the A.T. south of Sunrise Mountain, BTW; and the injured person was a hiker. I arrived just as they were littering him to the nearby road and talked to some of the SAR folks cleaning up.
A very wise post "Old Man." :)
I've read this thread from beginning to end. So far I've yet to see any serious argument that proclaims "Maps are bad."
Rather, I've seen mostly posts that say you can save a few bucks -- especially if you are comfortable with mooching on another hiker's maps.
I know many thru hikers could care less about the trail and it's attributes. But if you are in the minority with a sense of curiosity. Maps are cheap. Sooner or later most will find a map useful. Occasionally someone will find a map life saving.
Weary
Jack Tarlin
10-09-2008, 17:12
"Sooner or later"?
What's up with that?
When I'm on the Trail, I find the maps useful several times a day, every day, and not just "sooner or later".
smokymtnsteve
10-09-2008, 17:50
if you don't really care where you are ..you don't need a map...
now going into a real wilderness area a map could be useful or maybe not...
but since you won't be going into any real wilderness on the AT....
TwistedToad
10-09-2008, 18:34
"Sooner or later"?
What's up with that?
When I'm on the Trail, I find the maps useful several times a day, every day, and not just "sooner or later".
ditto ;)
Astrolabe people. It's all about the astrolabe.
smokymtnsteve
10-09-2008, 18:47
Astrolabe people. It's all about the astrolabe.
yes but isn't John Mc against the astrolabe?
trouthunter
10-09-2008, 19:07
On the subject of navigation: I have read many posts by people who wonder why you would want or need navigation gear on the AT or similar blazed trails.
The answer is very simple, if you are going to venture out in the backcountry you should have a basic knowledge of navigation, PERIOD.
You can not learn this just by reading a book at home, nor can you learn if you are lost.
The time to learn is when you are in the backcountry and already know where you are! :-? Just think, what better time will you have to learn navigation? You will have six months of almost uninterupted backcountry travel with which to hone your skills, the best way to learn something new is to do it every day.
I don't think it's a matter of having to have a map ( although I think it is wise) but rather, do you take advantage of a wonderful opportunity to learn this skill that way too many people do not have a proper grasp of!;)
No one should head out without a map and compass IMO. A GPSR is only a supplement to a map and compass and works only if you already know how to use it and have a map.
Yeah,yeah I know you can map your trek using way points and do the famous 180.
But it isn't that simple, the GPSR can tell you where you are and where you have been ( if you enter the info correctly) but it isn't worth a damn without a map to plot your future course on. Even if you have the coords for your destination all the GPSR can do is tell you how to get there as the crow flies, you still need a map to plot a realistic course!
__________________
I like maps, compass and data book. Gives me freedom and options.
"Sooner or later"?
What's up with that?
When I'm on the Trail, I find the maps useful several times a day, every day, and not just "sooner or later".
As I do. But that is because I'm curious about the trail. I like to know where that road leads, what that moutain is in the distance, what the day's terrain looks like.
Not all hikers care about such things. But even they "sooner or later" will find maps useful.
Weary
Alexander Supertramp did not drive to where he had a problem, he hiked there and a map would have saved him.
I'm not so sure about that. He walked in from a paved road that runs roughly north and south for over 200 miles. A competent outdoorsman would not have needed a map to find his way safely back to the road. Or to have easily survived at the bus for that length of time, for that matter. McCandless died because of poor judgment and a profound ignorance of how to take care of himself in the "wilderness." (He died in a bus on a trail.)
A large percentage of people who require rescue on the AT because they got lost were carrying maps. They just didn't know how to use them. Hundreds of people have safely hiked the AT without using maps. The main difference is knowledge and judgment. Knowledge and judgment will always be more important than what specific tools a person carries.
I can come up with examples on the AT where carrying a gun or a cell phone, or a satellite phone, or any number of other tools would likely have saved a hiker's life. It doesn't mean it's "stupid" for someone not to carry these tools on the AT.
Like I always say on these threads, if anyone wants to or needs to carry maps on the AT, they should. I didn't need maps on the AT, and if I hike the AT again I surely won't carry them. I'll be going back into the mountains in Wyoming in a few days, and I surely will.
why does this topic always start such a huge flame ?
To answer your question. You can make it with out the maps.
This guy did. First reported thru-hiker. In 1948, Earl V. Shaffer became
the first to report a thru-hike, walking the entire Trail from Georgia to
Maine.
Although I read somewhere that he did use road maps. I am thinking
probably to find places for re-supply and meet other hiking friends more
than anything.
Not sure how much one section of the official maps weigh, but I got to
handle one a guy had I came across out on the trail a few years back, and
I would guess it weighed as much as the little ATC data book, I wouldn't
leave with-out at least half of the Data book btw, but the Map sure had
lots of info, pretty, and was well made.
If you got the money buy them for the folks back home so they can be
more a part of your hike maybe ?
A few sites you might find useful:
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.851151/
http://rhodesmill.org/thefox/maps.html
http://www.trails.com/appalachian-trail.aspx?Source=GGL&oc=GGL&track=1&gclid=COXXwoqhopICFQEpxwodVQ_DQg
http://thru-hiker.com/materials/index.php
Paul at Thru-hiker has done both a NOBO and a SOBO as well as other long
trails. Ask him about if he used maps. Hes a straight up no BS type of guy.
If the Docs give me the green light on my shoulder I will be NOBO
sometime in March or April. I am thinking I will get my oldest son to get me
some free road maps from AAA, both state and regional, that cover the
AT. See which type might be useful for re-supply, trim the un-needed
parts off and go that style.
Best of Luck on your hike.
I am thinking I will get my oldest son to get me
some free road maps from AAA, both state and regional, that cover the
AT. See which type might be useful for re-supply, trim the un-needed
parts off and go that style.
I would be cautious and compare the road maps to the actual trail maps to ensure accuracy. For example, a quick examination of my American Map road atlas already reveals the following:
1.) The Connecticut map still shows the AT following the old Mohawk Trail route, rather than staying along the Housatonic.
2.) Both the New Jersey and New York maps show the Rt 284 crossing in New York, rather than NJ, and the NJ map shows it as actually north of Unionville.
3.) The Maine map still has the trail going through Monson rather than around.
I'm sure a more detailed study would show even more mistakes. If you want this sort of map, the Delorme atlases are the way to go. I am fortunate, in that my alma mater has a complete set in their library, and I still live close enough that I could go down one evening and make photocopies of the relevant sections.
sticks&stones
10-11-2008, 15:30
i never used maps on my first sobo thruhike, I threw my guidebook in the firepit near andover. I got info from nobos(until NY), sobos (if available), shelter logs, signs, but mostly from locals, along the way.
trouthunter
10-11-2008, 15:48
i never used maps on my first sobo thruhike, I threw my guidebook in the firepit near andover. I got info from nobos(until NY), sobos (if available), shelter logs, signs, but mostly from locals, along the way.
So much for self reliance!
Just because you can do a thru hike without a map, does not make it wise.:)
I personally get tired of unprepared people bugging me for this or that, because they were too lazy to be prepared.
why does this topic always start such a huge flame ?
To answer your question. You can make it with out the maps.
This guy did. First reported thru-hiker. In 1948, Earl V. Shaffer became
the first to report a thru-hike, walking the entire Trail from Georgia to
Maine.
The AT today is different in many ways from the AT in 1948. I believe it is safe to say, the 1948 AT could not exist in today's world. In fact, there would not be an AT today were it not for a massive land aquisition program necessitated by increasing user levels and changing land use patterns.
It's not a question of can you make it without maps, but rather a question of should you attempt it without them? I don't think resource managers and those who live near the AT are interested in having hikers wondering about on private land trying to figure out where they are relative to the AT.
I usually carry maps on the AT. I suspect I will continue to do so. Have not needed them yet but a search and rescue group used mine one night looking for three lost girls. All they had handy were road maps.
Fat Man Walking
10-13-2008, 23:10
But, I took a wrong turn where the trail was not marked and descended roughtly 1500 feet almost straight down. It was late in the afternoon and I didn't have the energy to climb back up to the trail. With a map and a compass, I was able to plot a course to get me out to a road and back on the trail where is crossed the road.
I won't leave home without them from now on.
But, as we are so quick to say on this site "HYOH."
Hikers who are unable to properly read and utilize maps want positive reinforcement IRT leaving them at home. Why else would the question be posed? After all, if someone was aware of map reading skills and the advantages/disadvantages of carrying a map for the areas about to hiked, why the hell would they ask if maps were necessary? They have already made the decision. This is the reason this subject gets attention and heated debates. Why would I give someone advice about maps without knowing their skills or experience? The answer is I wouldn't. Here is my advice: Hikers and backpackers need to learn map skills.
mtt37849
10-14-2008, 01:37
i think you're foolish and naive
:-?
I agree with Lone Wolf, what can a small, almost weightless map hurt; none but without it, it could hurt or cost days hiking a path that is wrog.
The AT today is different in many ways from the AT in 1948. I believe it is safe to say, the 1948 AT could not exist in today's world. In fact, there would not be an AT today were it not for a massive land aquisition program necessitated by increasing user levels and changing land use patterns.
It's not a question of can you make it without maps, but rather a question of should you attempt it without them? I don't think resource managers and those who live near the AT are interested in having hikers wondering about on private land trying to figure out where they are relative to the AT.
And I am proud to say I contribute to the "aquisition" and other ATC
programs
.
But what is your point about anyone "needing" the maps and the trail then
and now ? The AT is much better connected now than it was back then
from what I have read. Much, much better marked. Much easier to follow do
to much more foot traffic over the last 60 years. Lots and lots more Blazes.
I don't think anyone, including resource managers, will get to terribly upset if I
"wonder" onto their property. Although I personally think the chances of this
happening are nil. But I started developing outdoor skills over 50 years back.
I still might use the "road maps" just because I like maps and to maybe
feel more a part of history ?
Trail or no trail, map or no map I will bet on the person with the 'skills' and
'experience'.
As someone else said a map is only as good as its reader anyway.
btw Do you have any vested interest in ATC MAPS ? Just curious.
After all I did give links for some good free AT maps.
ATC maps, maybe I should carry them. maybe I am not so wise ?
But I will not. To heavy, cost to much, and bring to much of a type of world
I want to leave behind.
Adventure and adrenalin are my way.
Anyone up for some night hiking with just the moon and stars as our light ?
kayak karl
10-14-2008, 05:26
Hikers who are unable to properly read and utilize maps want positive reinforcement IRT leaving them at home. Here is my advice: Hikers and backpackers need to learn map skills.
i agree. i see more and more people that can't even read road maps. even knowing odd, even rt #'s doesn't seem to help them. maybe we need a AT Tom-Tom:D
Post #158 read. Reporting to work this morning and putting funds in my coffers seems better use of my time.
If a hiker is complaining that maps are too heavy, I'll make the call right now that he or she probably won't complete a thru-hike.
It's just that simple.
Jack Tarlin
10-14-2008, 12:28
Bearpaw nailed it.
And incidentally, Earl Shaffer used maps on many, many occasions during his 1948 hike, and he used the best ones he could find. The argument that the very first thru-hiker didn't rely on them or didn't feel they were necessary or very helpful is simply false.
And as to the statement that plenty of thru-hikers have finished the Trail without maps, well plenty of people have hiked without tents or other shelters; they've hiked without health insurance; they've hiked without adequate winter clothing; they've hiked without first aid kits; they've hiked without money.
Just because people have managed to finish the Trail without these sorts of things doesn't necessarily make it advisable or prudent to hike this way.
And the same holds true with maps.
The Old Fhart
10-14-2008, 15:15
Jack is right on Earl using maps. Earl knew the value of having maps and if you read his own words you can see this. In “Walking With Spring” Earl wrote the following as he was near Springer mountain:
“Which way did the trail turn? Trees were moss-spotted. Marking was faded. Because of mail difficulties at home I had not received maps and data ordered from the Appalachian Trail Conference, and now had nothing but a road map to guide me.”
As he approached GSMNP he wrote:
“No mail was waiting at the post office but the post master gave me a map of the Great Smoky Park, showing the trail route and shelter locations. For the next few days I actually would know the names of places and what to expect.”
Sometimes crooked thinking gets straightened out around here. It's nice to know we have plenty of straighteners.
So can anyone name one person that died while Hiking the AT because they
didn't have the maps ? It may sound harsh, but if someone has indeed died
only because they didn't have the maps, then I don't believe for a minute the
Maps would have helped. Reading Camping and Woodcraft which was first
published in 1906 by Horace Kephart will help much more than any map !
Keep maps in their proper pile please. The "things I might need" pile. And
anyone beyond Boy Scout age know you never take anything from the "things
I might need" pile !
I guess some failed to notice, refuse to acknowledge, or maybe just don't
know how to use "links" that I offered several options about the Maps. One
link even offered them ! SO lighten up please, and if I do get my shoulder
rehabbed for my Feb. or late March start. I will BET that not having the maps
will have nothing at all to do with me completing my hike.
They are to heavy, to expensive, and more worldly intrusion than I want or
need.
Nuff said by me.
Jack Tarlin
10-14-2008, 21:34
Here's what maps can do for you:
*They'll prevent you from getting lost.
*They'll help you out immeasurably if you DO get lost.
*They'll help if you need to leave the Trail in the event of an emergency
*They'll help you get to medical help, or will help you assist others
*They'll tell you where alternate water sources are located
*They'll help you intelligently plan your hiking each day
*They'll point out other georgraphic locations and points of interest
*They'll tell you if your day's hike will be easy, moderate, or difficult
These are just a few things that maps do.
How anyone thinks that any of this detracts from anyone's enjoyment of their hike is a mystery to me.
And in that they're easy to buy used On-Line or elsewhere, the idea that they are expensive is also absurd. They'll cost you a few bucks each. You'll
pay more for a Gatorade and a couple of candy bars.
Lastly, you'll seldom be carrying more than two or three maps at any one time. To suggest that deciding to carry maps means a dramatic increase in pack weight......well that's just silly. It's a handful of ounces. If you're that concerned about cutting back on a stuff in order to save weight, there are around a hundred other things that you should cut first.
The Old Fhart
10-14-2008, 22:04
Zzzzdyd-"This guy did. First reported thru-hiker. In 1948, Earl V. Shaffer became the first to report a thru-hike, walking the entire Trail from Georgia to Maine. You haven't acknowledged that you were horribly misinformed on Earl carrying maps or you distorted the facts. Try reading post #163 for Earl's own words, in case you missed them the first time around.
Zzzzdyd-"I guess some failed to notice, refuse to acknowledge, or maybe just don't know how to use "links" that I offered several options about the Maps. One link even offered them!"Apparently the only person who doesn't know how to use the links you referenced is you. If you actually checked the links you offer, they not only don't support your point that maps aren't needed, they say they are needed, or the links are totally irrelevant.
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site...QKtH/b.851151/
“Maps are strongly recommended for all hikers. Even though the Trail is well-marked, in an emergency you need to know how to get off the mountain as quickly as possible. Elevation profiles on the official maps also provide a graphic representation of how much up and down there is in each section.”
http://rhodesmill.org/thefox/maps.html
“National Park Service maps are graphical documents designed and produced as general orientation and route finding maps for the lay public. They are NOT intended for backcountry hiking, navigation, GPS referencing, mountaineering, and other specialized uses for which U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps are normally used.”So the reference you used, above, has maps the site says aren't intended or adequate for hiking-brilliant!
http://www.trails.com/appalachian-tr...FQEpxwodVQ_DQg Totally useless
http://thru-hiker.com/materials/index.php totally useless and nothing to do with maps
Wise Old Owl
10-14-2008, 22:06
I plan on thru-hiking 2009, I've been planning/investing in this for a long time, because I'm hard set in doing the ENTIRE hike and therefore I've read/used/and often torture tested a lot of my gear before I leave. After all I've come through with I've kind of come to the assumption that I'm not really going to need much navigation. The name of this site, White Blaze, really describes all the guidance you need, not to mention I'm pretty thoughtful, and rather good at knowing my bearings. If I leave a town I'm going to know how far and what to expect before the next town. I see people complaining about people who don't have maps, etc and want to use theirs... I'm trying to go ultralight but a map is the only thing I can justify leaving at home, so the others won't be a problem. What do you think?
Sorry that's just dumb. Too many changes, several places to make grave mistakes that can cost you. Yea I've made them.
Note to self: If someone asks if they can look at my map, politely ask "where is yours?" as I fold mine up and put it away. :)
All those who sight the convenience and safety aspects of maps are correct. I'll just add that the "long green tunnel" can get pretty boring at times. Maps provide a bit of ongoing interest to a hike. Yes. We read of injuries and other mishaps that sometimes force the end of a thru hike.
But there is nothing like boredom to magnify minor hurts and ills into trail-killing reasons for quitting.
Weary
Jack Tarlin
10-14-2008, 22:39
Funny thing. You pull out a pack of cigarettes and a guy bums one off you, your first impulse is to suggest he purchase his own if he's gonna smoke. You pull out a quart of Gatorade you just brought from town and a guy asks you for the first belt off of it, you'd give him a funny look. You dig out a Snickers Bar and some guy asks you for a bite, you'd tell him to jump off a cliff. You're working on a burger in a Trailside restaurant and a hiker you barely know asks you to buy him lunch and a beer, you'd think he was nuts.
But just about EVERY time you take out a map with other folks around, some cheapskate mapless dude is guaranteed to ask if he can borrow it for a few minutes. It happens all the time.
Mooching is mooching. Don't do it.
trouthunter
10-14-2008, 22:40
Tin Man,
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!
Unless they are in real danger or injured, let those who refuse to be prepared suffer.
This is how hard headed people learn!
trouthunter
10-14-2008, 22:42
Jack Tarlin,
Absolutely correct!!
It is a matter of personal responsibility, some of us have it, some don't!
Sad.
trouthunter
10-14-2008, 22:48
Also, anyone who really knows how to use a map and compass would not be caught without it, just like toilet paper!
If you don't know how to use a map, thru hiking is a great opportunity to learn, while you already know where you are, you can't learn when you are lost and hungry!
Get a book, or take some classes, don't be stuck on stupid!
Also, anyone who really knows how to use a map and compass would not be caught without it, just like toilet paper!
If you don't know how to use a map, thru hiking is a great opportunity to learn, while you already know where you are, you can't learn when you are lost and hungry!
Get a book, or take some classes, don't be stuck on stupid!
I'm guessing many who don't bring maps are stuck on stupid, both in terms of map literacy and essential gear literacy. I am done sharing, but I offer lessons... if the one asking has a map. :)
Funny thing. You pull out a pack of cigarettes and a guy bums one off you, your first impulse is to suggest he purchase his own if he's gonna smoke. You pull out a quart of Gatorade you just brought from town and a guy asks you for the first belt off of it, you'd give him a funny look. You dig out a Snickers Bar and some guy asks you for a bite, you'd tell him to jump off a cliff. You're working on a burger in a Trailside restaurant and a hiker you barely know asks you to buy him lunch and a beer, you'd think he was nuts.
But just about EVERY time you take out a map with other folks around, some cheapskate mapless dude is guaranteed to ask if he can borrow it for a few minutes. It happens all the time.
Mooching is mooching. Don't do it.
This reminds me of a few thru-hikers we ran into in NH this year looking to mooch something. No joke, a couple of folks asked if we had any water to spare AFTER they just passed a water source a mile or so before we saw them. Others were putting on some kind of yogi act when they saw us eating. After I educated my brother on what was what, we always ignored or replied no to any implicit or explicit mooching requests. I started thinking that talking to thru-hikers was not such a great idea. :-?
Blissful
10-14-2008, 23:31
I'm doing Shenandoah soon - it has all kinds of trail signs, granite markers and everything to mark the trail. Still I am carrying maps. I don't leave home without them. They are like having the right sleeping bag for the temps, a container for water, and food for the trip. They are a necessity not a luxury, because one can never bank on what may happen on a journey....
Jack Tarlin
10-14-2008, 23:37
And another thing....there's some VERY pretty stuff in Shenandoah Park that isn't on the A.T. This includes views, waterfalls, you name it, and lots of this stuff is just minutes from the Appalachian Trail.
Without a map you might never know it was there.
phillycheze
10-15-2008, 01:51
speaking of maps... which ones are the most useful and the lightest?
Hiking Navigation 101 (http://www.abc-of-hiking.com/navigation-skills/maps.asp), for those who don't know or understand the basics.
Click on compass navigation at bottom of page for further instructions.
phillycheze
10-15-2008, 10:46
speaking of maps... which ones are the most useful and the lightest?
Lone Wolf
10-15-2008, 10:48
speaking of maps... which ones are the most useful and the lightest?
the ones that are sold through the ATC
Chaco Taco
10-15-2008, 14:16
In the south, just use a book, tear out the pages as you finish or have the pages sent to you in drops that you will need. Use maps when you get to the Whites and MAine, much better than any books. Gives you more options.
Chaco Taco
10-15-2008, 14:16
the ones that are sold through the ATC
The maps for Maine are the best maps of te trail IMHO
smokymtnsteve
10-15-2008, 15:01
I think every shelter should have a resident map maybe on the wall behind plexiglass,
everyone carrying thier own maps means that the maps must be manufactured, causing trees to be cut down and toxic chemicals released in the maps production,,,therefore people who don't carry maps aren't contributing to the cutting of trees and enviornmental distruction of the map manufacturing.
and what is wrong with sharing? starts nice conversations and friendships.
I know that Earl had no maps when I met him in 98' in Georgia, nor did I.
Maybe the reason he carried them on his first thru, was because there was so many road miles to have to cover, unlike today.
"I" personnaly don't carry the maps or books. I write usefull information, to me, on a small piece of paper. Thats my choice. Don't worry everybody, I won't be peeking at yours. Other trails I will carry maps and pages of books.
There was one time on the AT that I remember a map being Very usefull. A thru hiker collapsed in the middle of the trail in the GSMNP. Those of us that came across him thought it was dehydration. Somebody got out a map. They found a side trail to a campground on there and headed out. A couple of hours later a ranger on horse back came to the recue. If that hiker didn't have a map, it would have been a Long hike, carrying him, to Davenport Gap.
Maps on shelter walls is a great idea.
trouthunter
10-15-2008, 16:41
Maps on shelter walls is a good idea!
On the subject of conservation: There is nothing wrong with responsible use of paper products, like maps, which are a safety issue and therefore justify the use of paper.
Contrary to popular opinion there is no shortage of trees in N. America where most of our paper pulp comes from, and a great deal of that is recycled.
For every tree cut in N. America 3 - 4 are planted.
I do respect your concern, I share it as well, but there is a lot of erroneous info out there by fringe groups. Beware!
Maps on shelter walls is a good idea!
On the subject of conservation: There is nothing wrong with responsible use of paper products, like maps, which are a safety issue and therefore justify the use of paper.
Contrary to popular opinion there is no shortage of trees in N. America where most of our paper pulp comes from, and a great deal of that is recycled.
For every tree cut in N. America 3 - 4 are planted.
I do respect your concern, I share it as well, but there is a lot of erroneous info out there by fringe groups. Beware!
Well, I doubt the accuracy of comment about planted trees. Almost no trees are planted in Maine -- just a few in highly visible locations, most for public relation reasons.
Maine has a very wet climate and in recent years precipitation is increasing. The scientists mostly blame climate change. But the abundant rain, spread over all four seasons, makes planting unnecessary. Natural regeneration provides an abundance of new trees.
Maps are an essential feature of the trail for many hikers. And their purchase provides important income for maintaining clubs and the ATC. At least 10 percent of MATC's $200,000 annual budget comes from profits from the sale of the club's guidebooks and maps.
Weary
Maps on shelter walls aren't going to help you when you come upon a section or intersection that is not blazed as well as it might be.
jersey joe
10-15-2008, 18:08
Funny thing. You pull out a pack of cigarettes and a guy bums one off you, your first impulse is to suggest he purchase his own if he's gonna smoke. You pull out a quart of Gatorade you just brought from town and a guy asks you for the first belt off of it, you'd give him a funny look. You dig out a Snickers Bar and some guy asks you for a bite, you'd tell him to jump off a cliff. You're working on a burger in a Trailside restaurant and a hiker you barely know asks you to buy him lunch and a beer, you'd think he was nuts.
But just about EVERY time you take out a map with other folks around, some cheapskate mapless dude is guaranteed to ask if he can borrow it for a few minutes. It happens all the time.
Mooching is mooching. Don't do it.
In all of your examples you lose something. When sharing a map, you lose nothing. I really didn't have a problem letting someone else see my map while I was thru hiking...perhaps they couldn't afford maps or did not realize they needed them...Either way I lost nothing by sharing my map for a few minutes and likely made a friend and not an enemy in the process...
I love reading maps and hike with maps whenever I can but honestly, you don't NEED maps when hiking the AT. I saw plenty of people do just fine with guidebooks.
Jack Tarlin
10-15-2008, 18:17
Don't get me wrong, Joe. In all my years, I've never refused anyone alook at my map.
But people should be self-reliant. If one wants to make regular use of a piece of gear or equipment during a trip, then one should purchase and carry that piece of equipment.
Periodically relying on other people, and relying on the availability of other people's stuff because you are too cheap or lazy to equip yourself, is simply wrong. It's mooching, it's taking advantage of others, and it should be avoided.
Earl did have maps in 1948, but not always the kind most hikers think of today. In his report to the ATC he wrote:
For extended trips like mine, the Guidebooks are too cumbersome. I would prefer a set of contour maps, marked with shelters, springs ans streams, points of interest and nearby towns. Had such a set been listed among available publications, I would have been delighted to send for it. As it was, I did fairly well on Roadmaps, and Park Service maps obtained by Rangers.
What is the benefit of advocating and promoting leaving a map behind when backpacking? Is it the satisfaction of liberating a few ounces of paper a person carries or is it allowing the map illiterate person a reason feel at ease IRT walking the AT or any hiking trail? ...... Or is it simply an attempt to justify their own personal decision?...... Anyone who chooses to hike without a map has a right to. Anyone who chooses to advocate that will be challenged.
I couldn't imagine hiking the AT without maps (for enjoyment alone), but there is something to be said for not knowing exactly what is down every lonely 2-lane or dirt road you cross.
Not having all the possible information some maps provide can add to the feeling of Wildness along the trail.
HikerRanky
10-16-2008, 07:37
Folks,
Personally, I carry a map.... I also respect people's decision to not carry a map. If you wish to debate the subject, then by all means debate it with your views and facts... No personal attacks will be tolerated...
Thanks!
Randy
Earl did have maps in 1948, but not always the kind most hikers think of today. In his report to the ATC he wrote:
I think that the maps in early guide books were next to worthless. No wonder Earl looked for alternatives.
There is no comparison between the information that 60 years and and now.
The Old Fhart
10-16-2008, 09:13
Peaks-"I think that the maps in early guide books were next to worthless. No wonder Earl looked for alternatives.
There is no comparison between the information that 60 years and and now."Here is an section of an old 1950 A.T.C. map of Hot Springs from the era of Earl's first thru hike.
4975(click to see larger image)
Compare that to a recent A.T.C. map of the same area. Notice the trail relo shown on the new map that moved the trail to Lover's Leap where you get the great view back toward the French Broad and Hot Springs.
4976(click to see larger image)
There is a big difference but the older map along with the detailed trail description in the 1950 guidebook would have worked and wasn't bad for its time, in fact, the best available then. Earl used the best maps he could get and intended to, and would have carried the A.T.C. maps, if there hadn't been a mail glitch. He carried a road map as a last resort and wasn't looking for alternatives but took a road map because he didn't get the maps he wanted.
From Walking With Spring-
"Because of mail difficulties at home I had not received maps and data ordered from the Appalachian Trail Conference, and now had nothing but a road map to guide me
...the post master gave me a map of the Great Smoky Park, showing the trail route and shelter locations. For the next few days I actually would know the names of places and what to expect.”.”
There is no doubt the new maps are much, much better but they weren't available in 1948. The newer maps are pretty much waterproof, in color, and have contour lines and the trail location is much more accurately plotted than the old maps. All these features are big pluses.
trouthunter
10-16-2008, 13:34
I do agree that each hiker has the right to choose to use or not use a map.
The freedom of choice we enjoy was put in place to give each individual the ability to make the best (wise) choice for them, and not have it dictated to him/her by a government.
So I do respect that, a lot of the pro map people enjoy the skill they have learned, and in hind sight, understand it's importance.
I'm sure many people hike the AT without a map and don't get lost. I have encountered many hikers who though they could, and end up asking me "Hey dude, can I have a gander at your map?" And then they proceed to wrinkle or fold it all wrong, or look at it with that blank stare map newbies have.:mad:
I have hiked Southern sections for many years and I can't count the number of times hikers have asked to use my map because they didn't have one. Same goes for lots of other items as well.
Not that I'm a greedy so and so, or that I don't want to help, but a lot of this is just hikers being ill prepared. Those of us who aquire the skills and gear to be self reliant just wish others would as well, and I think that is where a lot of the angst comes from.
I am a nice, caring person, but I really don't like moochers, some people are okay with mooching because in there world there is a lot of give and take mooching, so they don't really see it as mooching, I think they see it as a social "networking for needs" program.
Just my thoughts, I guess I'm a little old school, but if you are in real trouble out there you would have no better friend than me.;)
Personally, I can't wait for the tres cool holographic maps like you see in SciFi movies! :banana Of course, I'm still waiting for hover cars too..sigh...
i actually really like the idea of putting maps up in shelters. could give a good simple overview of the upcoming day. how long until water, elevation, distance to next shelter, scenic views/POI's. i mean it's the same purpose as carrying a map but still, it'd be nice
i actually really like the idea of putting maps up in shelters. could give a good simple overview of the upcoming day. how long until water, elevation, distance to next shelter, scenic views/POI's. i mean it's the same purpose as carrying a map but still, it'd be nice
I picture something like a mall map. YOU ARE HERE.
Will this shelter map also show the nearest Orange Julius and Gap? ;)
"I might not hike with a map"
If you are not hiking, do you need a map?
"I might not hike with a map"
If you are not hiking, do you need a map?After 4012 lame posts, this is really funny.
i actually really like the idea of putting maps up in shelters. could give a good simple overview of the upcoming day. how long until water, elevation, distance to next shelter, scenic views/POI's. i mean it's the same purpose as carrying a map but still, it'd be nice
I can think of several places in the AT county I live where such maps already exist. There are few additional places they'd stay where they're put and not be in need of constant replacement. I would add many of the shelters built more recently are situated on short blue-blazes which would require hikers leaving the AT to refer to these maps.
While this idea is not without merit, it still doesn't provide a map-in-hand when one may be needed most.
Jack Tarlin
10-16-2008, 14:27
Maps in shelters could well disappear (this happens a lot to maps at trailheads, on bulletin boards, kiosks, etc).
It'd be a great shame if folks didn't carry maps assuming that they didn't need them cuz they could count on there being one in the shelter.
You CAN'T count on this.
People should carry and use their own maps.
Cabin Fever
10-16-2008, 15:52
I got lost the other day hiking in the Bishop Hollow area near Roan Mountain proper. There were old logging roads, ATV trails, game trails and the AT (or so I thought) all coming together in one spot. I used my the topo to figure out where I was and shortly thereafter was back on the AT.
it wasn't my idea brosef. it was suggested earlier in this thread - and i was merely agreeing with it. but i personally like to look at the big maps posted at a lot of PA's state parks before i start out, as opposed to the little ones i carry w/ me, which i try to use as infrequent as possible. i'm not suggesting it as a replacement, but a nice little suppliment...
You no doubt would like the sign at PA 501 which has elevation profiles and distances to all POIs.
While the AT does pass through state parks, it is not a state park, but rather a national scenic trail. Just as Maine and Vermont are more attractive to some because of their prohibition of billboards along highways, it could be profitably argued the AT is more attractive without an excess of signs and advertising. Sometimes less is more.
smokymtnsteve
10-16-2008, 20:24
Maps on shelter walls aren't going to help you when you come upon a section or intersection that is not blazed as well as it might be.
will nobody said it was a perfect solution.:rolleyes:
trouthunter
10-16-2008, 20:39
Although as mentioned earlier, maps in shelters would be vulnerable to vandalism, I still think it is a good idea. Heck, if nothing else it might get people to thinking about maps, who knows, the light bulb might go on. Also if someone wanted to vandalize a shelter they could build a fire in one.
It most certainly would not be a replacement for the individuals map, and as I posted earlier, I realize some people will not carry one, and it is possible to hike the AT without one.
It is possible to drive a car without insurance too although it is not advisable.
trouthunter
10-16-2008, 21:27
It is possible to drive a car without insurance too although it is not advisable.
I agree, just because you have the right, or ability, to do something, doesn't make it the wise thing to do.
Info on how to navigate without a compass and/or map.
http://www.amazon.com/review/product/048640613X/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?_encoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/finding-direction.html
Info on how to use Compass and Maps:
http://www.learn-orienteering.org/old/
http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/3UFZYIN0OJ89O
Basic needs for survival
in the wilderness
Warmth
http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/images/warm-fire.jpg Maintaining ideal body temperature is crucial when dealing with survival in the wilderness. Our bodies operate within a narrow temperature range. You can't get too hot or too cold, or you'll die.
In most wilderness survival situation the challenge is to keep you warm, even in the desert. During daytime the sun and the high temperature is a problem and you need shadow, but during the night the land can cool rapidly and you need warmth.
Water
http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/images/survival-water.jpg After we have secured our body temperature, we need to remain hydrated in order for biological processes to take place. The human body is 75 per cent water and need a constant supply of water to function. Water is essential to life.
The average person can survive for three days without water. Don't wait until you run out of water before you look for more.
http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/images/sleep.jpg
Sleep
As humans we need a certain amount of sleep to remain rational. Without sleep, our minds begin to hallucinate and we become unable to make conscious decisions to better our situation.
http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/images/food.jpg Food
An average adult can survive for three weeks without food. Food is rarely the first priority.
Continue to learn more about survival in the wilderness. (http://www.wilderness-survival-skills.com/how-to-survive-in-the-wilderness.html)
Best of luck class of 2009. I will be the guy with the AAA road map
because all I will need to find is the AYCE places. Some of the nicest
people I have ever met were the ones I ask, "How do I _______" :)
Blissful
10-16-2008, 21:48
Not sure what good a map is posted at a shelter. Sure it would show you where you're at that night and what is ahead, but who then remembers it once they have left that morning? I don't have a photographic memory myself.
Not sure what good a map is posted at a shelter. Sure it would show you where you're at that night and what is ahead, but who then remembers it once they have left that morning? I don't have a photographic memory myself.
Mapless folk can simply make a copy on the back of their hand. :) Oh wait, that won't work - ink is heavy. :rolleyes:
a guy could wake up and enjoy his coffee while checking out how far away water and where he would enjoy lunch would be :D
and the insurance thing is kinda weak. it's illegal to drive w/o insurance.
It is possible to drive a car without insurance too although it is not advisable.
the insurance thing is kinda weak. it's illegal to drive w/o insurance.
That would make driving without insurance inadvisable, now wouldn't it? True, hikers aren't required by law to purchase maps, but it's still a good idea.
We purchase insurance hoping we won't need it but realizing there's a chance we might. If only we could sell our insurance policies to someone else at the end of their terms and we could obtain as much useful and interesting information by reading them.
nope. health insurance would've been a better choice of analogies
This begs the question: how do people find the trail to begin with?
only those with maps find it. the others park along the side of the road and look for 'hiker-types' to drive by, and follow them
Pedaling Fool
10-17-2008, 10:15
People don't get car insurance because it's illegal to drive without, they get it in case they get in an accident. The fact that it's illegal to drive w/o insurance may factor in, but if they KNEW they would not get in an accident they wouldn't purchase it -- it has nothing to do with obeying the law, like good citizens:rolleyes:. Driving over the speed limit is against the law - how many of you always drive the speed limit.
trouthunter
10-17-2008, 10:31
Getting car insurance was a wise choice before the many less intelligent types who wouldn't forced the legislature in each state to make it the law.
The basic premise of the analogy was that smart people get car insurance because it's the wise choice. The fact that some people have to be forced to do the right thing just proves that many people left to their own designs will not make the wise choice.
Why is that so hard to understand?
I'm not sure what the rules and laws are in other parts of the country, but not carrying maps in NH could cost you thousands of dollars.
There is a law in NH - if you need to be rescued and you are unprepared, you will be charged for the cost of the rescue. This is typically a couple of thousand dollars, more if you need a helicopter.
One of the things that is considered essential by NH Fish & Game (who are in charge of all rescues) for all hikers is a map and a compass and the ability to use them. So be aware that if you break and ankle or get caught in a storm, lost in the fog, get lost, etc... If you require a rescue and you do not have a map and a compass on you, you will be charged for the rescue.
So, in NH at least, the cost of a map and compass can be considered the cost of insurance should you find yourself needing assistance.
trouthunter
10-17-2008, 10:46
I'm not sure what the rules and laws are in other parts of the country, but not carrying maps in NH could cost you thousands of dollars.
There is a law in NH - if you need to be rescued and you are unprepared, you will be charged for the cost of the rescue. This is typically a couple of thousand dollars, more if you need a helicopter.
One of the things that is considered essential by NH Fish & Game (who are in charge of all rescues) for all hikers is a map and a compass and the ability to use them. So be aware that if you break and ankle or get caught in a storm, lost in the fog, get lost, etc... If you require a rescue and you do not have a map and a compass on you, you will be charged for the rescue.
So, in NH at least, the cost of a map and compass can be considered the cost of insurance should you find yourself needing assistance.
It's good to see that someone in NH has their head screwed on straight, that should be the law in every state!
Way to go NH.
Pedaling Fool
10-17-2008, 10:47
Actually the basic premise of the analogy is:
You get insurance (whether car, home…) to protect yourself in the event of the unexpected. Many would say you should carry a map for the same reason; I’m included in that group.
I don’t carry maps to find my way on the AT; I carry maps for the unexpected. There are many examples people have shared on this website to justify carrying a map, even on the AT.
If one does not want to carry a map and many have without a problem, then go ahead, but don’t tell others there’s no risk. It’s all about your willingness to accept certain risks. We all have different thresholds for different activities.
I don’t hike without a map, but I don’t have a problem with fording the Kennebec, but I’m not going to tell someone there’s no risk.
Intelligent discussion.:-?:cool:
Mapless folk can simply make a copy on the back of their hand. :) Oh wait, that won't work - ink is heavy. :rolleyes:
True story.
A few years ago, a friend of mine lead a canyoneering trip in Utah. Utah is truly Wilderness in many places. I mean, middle-of-nowhere kind of Wilderness.
The canyoneers were in rope teams of 4 or 5 people. The idea was that each team would be self contained. You know..have a map, compass, possibly a GPS (useful above canyons). Well, one team did not. The team forgot/neglected to bring maps. Their solution? THEY PHOTOGRAPHED THE MAPS ON A DIGITAL CAMERA FROM ANOTHER TEAM! They were also late getting out of camp and raced to catch up to the two other teams. So they did not bother to turn around and go back to camp. (I'm a bastard, I would told them to get their kiesters back..)
This worked about as well as you would expect. Meaning, it didn't. :)
They zigged where they should have zagged. Became lots. At 8pm or so, my friends had to go looking for them (3 three hours after everyone but the, ahem, "dream team" had been back in camp). At 2am, everyone was finally back in camp! For want of map....
I am not going to get embroiled in this perpetual debate again. I just think what Tin Man said as a joke was a little too close to reality in one case. :)
Obviously, Utah is a bit more wild than the AT. Take from this story what you will.....
oldfivetango
10-17-2008, 14:56
After doing a speed scan of all TWELVE pages of this here map thread
I admit that nowhere in there did I see a reference to the MapDana.
I am wondering if they are considered to be worth anything to the
"hikes with a map" crowd.
Incidentally,I would not consider not having at least some sort of
map for orientation purposes.My mapdana looks pretty reliable to me....
....just wondering what you pros think of them.
Oldfivetango
Pedaling Fool
10-17-2008, 15:01
I've seen those mapdanas, I think it's just a marketing tool for all the ultras. They cannot depict the actual information for navigation that a map does -- I'm not talking about nice-to-know-stuff, like profiles... I can't remember, but I think there's 5 or 6 for the entire trail (someone correct me...).
Jack Tarlin
10-17-2008, 17:25
I have friends who've served in the Coast Guard who've rescued boaters whose navigation maps were these ridiculous plasticized things that exactly resembled restaurant placemats.
Considering a Mapdanna as a suitable replacement for a real Trail map is the hiking version of the boating foolishness.
Get a real map. Learn how to use it. Never hike without it.
Cuz remember, if you ever find yourdelf in a real jam, the Coast Guard or the cavalry or whatever might not find you in time.
halibut15
10-17-2008, 19:56
Four words: hike your own hike. People have done it with and without maps and there are risks (different ones) involved with both. End of discussion.
Four words: hike your own hike. People have done it with and without maps and there are risks (different ones) involved with both. End of discussion.
What is the risk of hiking with a map?
What is the risk of hiking with a map?
You beat me too it. Plus your answer was a nicely precise question, i.e. the best kind.
The Old Fhart
10-17-2008, 21:39
TD55-"What is the risk of hiking with a map?"You bring up a very good point that the 'ignorance is bliss' anti-map people completely miss. There is the 'risk' that by carrying a map you might actually know where you're going, learn something about your surroundings, and have a useful tool in case of an emergency.;)
Four words: hike your own hike. People have done it with and without maps and there are risks (different ones) involved with both. End of discussion.Hike your own hike is all well and good, but you can't pull that card in a thread like this. Read the OP. Answer the question with HYOH and you would sound like a jerk. What I have posted before is that I tend to think that folks who ask about the need for maps probably are not comfortable with their own map skills. That may not always be the case but I have a good handle on navigation and maps and would never consider asking such a question. If I were to consider leaving a map behind, I sure wouldn't ask someone to tell me that it was going to be OK. Those who respond by saying "you don't need a map on the AT" are giving incomplete advice. When that happens folks chime in about the importance of learning navigation/ map reading skills and to carry maps for the area one plans to hike because that is the correct advice to give.
Four words: hike your own hike. People have done it with and without maps and there are risks (different ones) involved with both. End of discussion.
"Can you hike without a map?" is an entirely different question that "Should you hike without a map?"
If you want to hike without a map, you should ask yourself a couple of other questions. Do you drive without a seatbelt? Do you filter and treat your water? Do you wear a helmet when riding a bike? Are you carrying a cell phone 'just in case'?
trouthunter
10-17-2008, 23:16
Hike your own hike is all well and good, but you can't pull that card in a thread like this. Read the OP. Answer the question with HYOH and you would sound like a jerk. What I have posted before is that I tend to think that folks who ask about the need for maps probably are not comfortable with their own map skills. That may not always be the case but I have a good handle on navigation and maps and would never consider asking such a question. If I were to consider leaving a map behind, I sure wouldn't ask someone to tell me that it was going to be OK. Those who respond by saying "you don't need a map on the AT" are giving incomplete advice. When that happens folks chime in about the importance of learning navigation/ map reading skills and to carry maps for the area one plans to hike because that is the correct advice to give.
"Hike your own hike" is a nice catch phrase that really has no merit in a discussion about trail safety. There are safer and less safe ways of doing things.
Going into the backcountry with out a map or compass and the skills to use them is the less safe way.
I don't see how anyone could make a credible argument to the contrary.
If you wish to hike without a map go ahead, just be aware you are at a greater risk, I really don't care, one day you may learn the hard way.
trouthunter
10-17-2008, 23:17
In case I wasn't clear, I'm agreeing with you Ed Bell
<snip>
I don't see how anyone could make a credible argument to the contrary.
If you wish to hike without a map go ahead, just be aware you are at a greater risk, I really don't care, one day you may learn the hard way.
The fact is that some folks wish to Promote and Advocate hiking the AT without maps, map skills and/or navigation skills. The AT, no matter how well blazed it is, should never be a reason to advocate hiking without a map and the skills to use it.
More good reasons (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27078176/) to carry maps, compass and appropriate gear no matter where or how long you plan to be out. It could mean the difference between life and death, not only for you but possibly a friend or a stranger.
I wouldn't be caught dead without map and compass , in fact, they are the first two items i check for when gearing up to go out.
fiddlehead
10-18-2008, 07:37
Maps will be obsolete in a few years.
The newer GPS's tell you so much more than a map that has a few miles (or less) on either side of the trail, and too many people think that a map will keep them from getting lost.
I travelled with a guy who thought he knew how to use a compass but it got him in so much trouble because he insisted the red part was pointing south. A lot of good the map did him.
I've been in many situations where there is fog and a bunch of people sitting around arguing over where they are on the map. (I've been one of them too)
anyway, that's my 2 cents to this debate that's been on here as much as the Kennebec thread.
(I would still carry a compass though) and a state highway map is not a bad idea.
trouthunter
10-18-2008, 09:39
Maps will be obsolete in a few years.
The newer GPS's tell you so much more than a map that has a few miles (or less) on either side of the trail, and too many people think that a map will keep them from getting lost.
I travelled with a guy who thought he knew how to use a compass but it got him in so much trouble because he insisted the red part was pointing south. A lot of good the map did him.
I've been in many situations where there is fog and a bunch of people sitting around arguing over where they are on the map. (I've been one of them too)
anyway, that's my 2 cents to this debate that's been on here as much as the Kennebec thread.
(I would still carry a compass though) and a state highway map is not a bad idea.
You are correct, the newer GPSRs are impressive and the new mapping tech from places like Topo.com or Nat. Geo. Topo! plus the stuff from Magellan adds a whole new dimension to mapping abilities of GPSRs.
However I have never known of a map not getting a signal or it's batteries running down ect. GPSRs are only a compliment to topos and should be treated as such. Electronic devices are always subject to malfunction although I agree GPSRs are a valuable Nav. tool
As far as not knowing where you are on the map : You should keep up with your position on the map as you hike not just check when in doubt, that is one of the biggest mistakes people make especially on blazed trails. Then they whip out the GPSR to get their coords and that causes them to view the GPSR as superior to topos. While the GPSR has superior features, it is not more reliable than a paper topo. IMO
Although I love my G60x :D
Maps will be obsolete in a few years. ......
I've been in many situations where there is fog and a bunch of people sitting around arguing over where they are on the map. (I've been one of them too).....
Reminds me of the time I was showing a guy from out of state the two-mile wide Kennebec River estuary near my home. Suddenly a coastal fog moved in and we could hardly see the bow of my boat.
The guy panicked. "Calm down," I said. "In Maine we can navigate with a bag of potatoes."
He looked skeptical. But I assured him we would be okay. "Here," I said. Throw these potatoes one at a time just as hard as you can. When one doesn't land in the water, turn quickly."
Weary
(I would still carry a compass though) and a state highway map is not a bad idea.
Does fiddlehead's recommendation meet the New Hampshire Fish and Game standard of preparedness mentioned earlier? Could someone please link this requirement and tell us how its language is interpreted by officials responsible for deciding who pays?:-?
The Old Fhart
10-18-2008, 13:11
Shades of Gray-"Could someone please link this requirement and tell us how its language is interpreted by officials responsible for deciding who pays?:-?"This may be the answer but it isn't spelled out what is required, only that Fish and Game can determine whether a rescued party acted negligently or not.
AN ACT relative to search and rescue response expenses of the fish and game department and relative to appropriating additional funding for certain fish and game programs.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
167:1 Fish and Game Department; Powers; Search and Rescue. Amend RSA 206:26, XII to read as follows:
XII. To conduct search and rescue operations in woodlands and inland waters and to provide security at the sites thereof, and to enforce recovery of expenses under RSA 206:26-bb;
167:2 New Section; Search and Rescue Response Expenses; Recovery. Amend RSA 206 by inserting after section 26-b the following new section:
206:26-bb Search and Rescue Response Expenses; Recovery.
I. Notwithstanding RSA 153-A:24, any person determined by the department to have acted negligently in requiring a search and rescue response by the department shall be liable to the department for the reasonable cost of the department’s expenses for such search and rescue response. The executive director shall bill the responsible person for such costs. Payment shall be made to the department within 30 days after the receipt of the bill, or by some other date determined by the executive director. If any person shall fail or refuse to pay the costs by the required date, the department may pursue payment by legal action, or by settlement or compromise, and the responsible person shall be liable for interest from the date that the bill is due and for legal fees and costs incurred by the department in obtaining and enforcing judgment under this paragraph. All amounts recovered, less the costs of collection and any percentage due pursuant to RSA 7:15-a, IV(b), shall be paid into the fish and game search and rescue fund established in RSA 206:42.
The WMNF and NH Fish and Game created this site:
http://www.hikesafe.com/
To educate people about how to be safe in the woods.
Here is what they consider the 10 essentials:
http://www.hikesafe.com/index.php/planning_your_hike/gear_list/the_10_essentials
I'm not saying that for sure if you don't have all of these items that you would be charged for a rescue. However, F&G is the agency that would conduct the rescue and ultimately determine if you were negligent in the eyes of the state.
"Here," I said. Throw these potatoes one at a time just as hard as you can. When one doesn't land in the water, turn quickly."
Weary
:):clap Thanks Weary. That's one of the best stories I've heard in quite a while.
garlic08
10-18-2008, 17:47
Returning to the original question--I'm going to guess, based on the short bio and young age, that the OP has little experience. No way would I recommend to this person to head out without a set of maps.
I didn't use maps on the AT this year, not even mooching, and it was kind of fun not knowing where the trail was heading. I accepted the risk for myself and did fine, but I agree that risk is not for everyone.
In my last few seasons on the PCT and CDT, I was pretty anal about navigation and never once got lost. While I was proud of that feat, I was a little jealous of other hikers who had a more laissez faire attitude about it, got lost once in a while, and that seemed to just add to their adventure--meeting ranchers, wandering into mining camps, seeing small towns in isolated valleys, cool stuff. Going beyond the limits of your comfort zone is one of the great lessons of thru hiking.
I believe the maps for the AT will be going on sale soon from the ATC for those that are interested.
Reminds me of the time I was showing a guy from out of state the two-mile wide Kennebec River estuary near my home. Suddenly a coastal fog moved in and we could hardly see the bow of my boat.
The guy panicked. "Calm down," I said. "In Maine we can navigate with a bag of potatoes."
He looked skeptical. But I assured him we would be okay. "Here," I said. Throw these potatoes one at a time just as hard as you can. When one doesn't land in the water, turn quickly."
Weary
Ha Ha Ha. Very good.
Reminds me of the time I was on the water and ran into a fog bank. This happened prior to all the GPS's and chart plotters of today. And we didn't have a radar dome. We were simply navigating using a nautical chart, compass, and a watch. When our timed course calculations showed we should make our turn, we confirmed it by the direction of a fog horn and checking our only other navigation device, a simple depth gauge that showed we were center channel. Next time, I will have to bring a bag of potatoes.