View Full Version : Moved from Straight Forward: Thru Hiker Definition
NorseWoman
10-27-2008, 04:12
In what length of time must a thru hike be finished to officially qualify as a thru hike?
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 04:14
there is no official qualification
there is no official qualification
Most folks think that it should be within the calendar year, unless you're SOBO, then you have 12 months or so...
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 06:39
i disagree. 2 months, 12 months or 23 months. who cares? it don't matter. just hike
Okay just hike... but would 23 months be a thruhike or several sections....? Seems to me it would be pretty hard to do a thru that long. Even Jaws/Unknown Hiker didn't take that long and he was out there forever!
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 06:56
Okay just hike... but would 23 months be a thruhike
yes it would. there is no rule or qualification
bigcranky
10-27-2008, 07:21
No such thing as an "official" thru-hike. The ATC gives the "2000-miler" patch to anyone who completes the entire trail, no matter how much time it takes.
Look at it this way: if you take a week off the trail during your thru, are you suddenly doing two section hikes? How about 2 weeks off? A month? A single day? The whole debate would get a little silly.
When I finally finish on the installment plan, some time in the year 2065, I'll get the same 2000 Miler patch.
I stand corrected.... We all know there is no "official" thruhike and that anyone completing the trail gets the patch whether it took 3 months or 30 years. But I know I've heard discussions more than once about a "thru" being 12 months or less. Taking a week to a month or so off is normal, especially in cases of injury. But seems to me taking several months off, several times, would not be a thru. But I'm probably wrong.
I think that Wingfoot may have originated the 12 month definition.
And, anyone who completes the entire AT is a "2000 miler."
As Lone Wolf stated, there is no official time requirement.
No one's verifying anything. It's just a piece of paper and a patch from the ATC.
Best idea is just to get out in the woods and enjoy yourself and to heck with trying to keep up with someone else's idea of what's a thru-hike.
Montana Mac
10-27-2008, 08:48
hyoh
buff_jeff
10-27-2008, 08:56
Who cares? People seriously cream their pants over the thrus. Just hike and have fun. They're not better than somebody out for a day, or somebody out for a weekend.
No one has ever thru-hiked that AT. Who will be the first???
lonehiker
10-27-2008, 12:05
As someone who attempted, and failed, a thru-hike I am going to give my .02 worth. A successful thru-hiker is not a better person than any other hiker, however, it does take a tremendous amount of mental (mostly) and physical fortitude to complete the entire trail as a thru-hike (define it as you wish). Something, perhaps, that unsuccessful thru-hikers lack, at least at that point in time. I know that we will hear the argument that most people aren't in a position to attempt a thru-hike because of job commitments, finances, family obligations, etc..... That is fine, but for those that have been able to put themselves in a position (or just got lucky) to do this, and were successful, give credit where credit is due.
I have seen many posts on WB by unsuccessful thru-hikers. Immediately responses (I suppose of encouragement) come back saying that it wasn't unsuccessful as you were hiking etc. blah blah blah..... Well, if the person intended to hike the entire trail in one hike, it was an unsuccessful thru-hike. Take accountability of that and move on. If you want it bad enough try again. If you can't or don't want that, section hike it. If you can't or don't want that, well, become a cyber-hiker.
No one has ever thru-hiked that AT. Who will be the first???
Hey, I like this.
Let's define a Thru Hike as one continuous hike, no leaving the trail. Can only re-supply via caches or stores directly on the trail. Can stop at an official shelter or campsite to sleep, but must hike every day and camp at a different shelter or campsite each night.
Now who wants to be the first REAL Thru-Hiker? :D
This is what I call "hiking angels on the head of a pin discussion".
There is no official definition. Most people think that a thru-hike is the act of hiking a trail in one "season". Even that is open for interpretation!
So, there is no official definition. Thank (insert deity of choice)! :sun
I stand corrected.... We all know there is no "official" thruhike and that anyone completing the trail gets the patch whether it took 3 months or 30 years. But I know I've heard discussions more than once about a "thru" being 12 months or less. Taking a week to a month or so off is normal, especially in cases of injury. But seems to me taking several months off, several times, would not be a thru. But I'm probably wrong.Common sense says that you are right. The problem is coming up with how long a layoff is too long? 7 days is okay, 700 is not. 21 days is okay. How about 60 days. Hmmm. 90? 120? 365? The problem you face is coming up with a number for your rule where under it is a thru and over it is not, because no matter how you slice it, if you have a time limit, you need a cut-off.
Simplest would be a rule that says a thru is one year or less, which is what HMOH folks usually require:
"If you finish your hike in 365 days, it is a thru hike. If you finish your hike in 366 days, it is a section hike, unless it is a leap year, in which case 366 days is a thru hike and 367 days is not."
Outside of Whiteblaze, Trail Place and similar sites, no one really cares. Hell, most of the people here don't care.
there is no rule or qualificationWhat about qualifications for thru-hiker trail magic at places like Fontana Dam? :D
For my personal definition, I decided on the 365-day rule.
I think the real test is whether you had to put ordinary life on hold until the whole trail was hiked.
PS--If the distinction is never leaving the trail, the closest contenders would be supported hikers, like Karl Meltzer. An interesting twist in the effort to define "thruhiker."
jersey joe
10-27-2008, 13:38
My official opinion is...365 Days or less.
max patch
10-27-2008, 14:16
I have seen many posts on WB by unsuccessful thru-hikers. Immediately responses (I suppose of encouragement) come back saying that it wasn't unsuccessful as you were hiking etc. blah blah blah..... Well, if the person intended to hike the entire trail in one hike, it was an unsuccessful thru-hike. Take accountability of that and move on. If you want it bad enough try again. If you can't or don't want that, section hike it. If you can't or don't want that, well, become a cyber-hiker.
You are exactly right.
Nothing "wrong" with failure; it helps one grow.
max patch
10-27-2008, 14:19
Throwing on your backpack and hiking terminus to terminus in a single continuous journey.
lonehiker
10-27-2008, 14:46
Throwing on your backpack and hiking terminus to terminus in a single continuous journey.
This is fundamentally correct but what about zero days?
The 365 day definition has a theoretical problem in that a person could start 1 Jan. and hike until say 28 Feb., then stop (or zero) until 1 Nov. and hike until summiting on 31 Dec. Would this be a thru-hike?
My definition would be that it is a continuous journey from terminus to terminus with only reasonable amounts of time off. My whimsical definition of "reasonable amounts of time off" would be, zero days shall not exceed 14 consecutive days off. I said whimsical because I could have just as easily have said 7 or 21 consecutive days off. The point being that if you take a significant amount of time off, you have become a section hiker.
This is fundamentally correct but what about zero days?
If you pause for longer than 10 minutes to rest or take a night off to sleep, you are no longer a thru-hiker.
max patch
10-27-2008, 15:30
Remember, everyone, this is the Straight Forward forum.
Words have meanings, that why we have dictionaries.
I agree that thru hiking does not make one a better hiker than someone that has not thru hiked. In some way a section hiker works harder than a thru hiker. And while the ATC does not recognize thru hikers with a special award they do make a clear distinction between thru hikers and section hikers. Anyone who has ever had their picture taken in Harper's Ferry has been asked weather they are a thru hiker or section hiker with the goal of finishing the entire trail.
I like Wingfoots old definition. You must complete the entire trail in one calendar year. You must walk by every white blaze, no yellow/blue/pink/brown/aqua or any other blazing as a substitute for white blazing. Zero days are ok but you must not return to normal life (Job/School/what ever your life was before the trail). The not return to normal life gives people that chance to recover from minor injuries, attend, weddings, side trips to Washington DC and other things.
I would also still consider someone that has a serious injury that keeps them from being able to finish the trail in one calendar year the the title of thru hiker if they return and complete the unfinished portion of the trail in one hike.
I also belive in "Hike your own hike" .
I like Wingfoots old definition. You must complete the entire trail in one calendar year. You must walk by every white blaze, no yellow/blue/pink/brown/aqua or any other blazing as a substitute for white blazing. Zero days are ok but you must not return to normal life.
"Must" is a four letter word.
Clearly, people define things to fit their own perspective. If you walk from end to end many would define that a a thru hike. If you don't pass a white blaze others will say you did nothing. Zero days, taking assistance from someone (trail magic for many, support for others) and many other issues can lead some to "disqualify" your efforts. But only if you let them. Your effort is your own. If you choose to let others define whether it is worthy or not, then you have decided to be a pawn.
Just hike, and if you have a rewarding experience, then you are successful.
Are we talking length or width?
If you do not like the term thru hiker then just be happy calling yourself a 2000 miler or section hiker. The At is a hiking trail, enjoy it however you want, but the term thru hiker is ment for those who have hiked the entire trail in one continous effort. Only those who have not thru hiked disagree. Not being a thru hiker does not take away from anyones accomplishment. I have a great deal of respect for section hikers as should all thru hikers, after all that is how most of do the majority of our hiking.
The Solemates
10-27-2008, 16:30
my personal opinion is that it must be hiked in less than 365 years...
Pootz,
The point here is how does one define "one continous effort".
The original question was how long does one have to complete a thru hike. I like the answer 1 calendar year. And one Continuous effort is defined by: Not returning to normal life.
On this issue I think wingfoot had it right. Out of all the definitions I have seen I like his best. It gives some leeway but has enoughrestrictions.
I think I am going to start a new thread "Who misses Wingfoot". Love him of hate him he did add something to the At that may never be replaced. Please do not respond to this on this thread, I will start a new one for that stuff. Shoudl be fun.
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 17:28
Throwing on your backpack and hiking terminus to terminus in a single continuous journey.
that means no days off
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 17:29
The original question was how long does one have to complete a thru hike. I like the answer 1 calendar year. And one Continuous effort is defined by: Not returning to normal life.
On this issue I think wingfoot had it right. Out of all the definitions I have seen I like his best. It gives some leeway but has enoughrestrictions.
I think I am going to start a new thread "Who misses Wingfoot". Love him of hate him he did add something to the At that may never be replaced. Please do not respond to this on this thread, I will start a new one for that stuff. Shoudl be fun.
winfoot was just one guy. he hasn't hiked since 92. his so-called definition means squat
max patch
10-27-2008, 17:35
that means no days off
No it doesn't.
I agree that thru hiking does not make one a better hiker than someone that has not thru hiked. In some way a section hiker works harder than a thru hiker. And while the ATC does not recognize thru hikers with a special award they do make a clear distinction between thru hikers and section hikers. Anyone who has ever had their picture taken in Harper's Ferry has been asked weather they are a thru hiker or section hiker with the goal of finishing the entire trail.
I like Wingfoots old definition. You must complete the entire trail in one calendar year. You must walk by every white blaze, no yellow/blue/pink/brown/aqua or any other blazing as a substitute for white blazing. Zero days are ok but you must not return to normal life (Job/School/what ever your life was before the trail). The not return to normal life gives people that chance to recover from minor injuries, attend, weddings, side trips to Washington DC and other things.
I would also still consider someone that has a serious injury that keeps them from being able to finish the trail in one calendar year the the title of thru hiker if they return and complete the unfinished portion of the trail in one hike.
I also belive in "Hike your own hike" .This is what I don't understand. People (not just you; yours is but a mild example) list three long paragraphs of rules with "you must" and "you must not" all kinds of things, and then say you believe in Hike Your Own Hike.
If people are "allowed" to hike their own hike," how can you also say they must do it in a certain time frame or must not go to school but may attend a wedding?
Either people can hike their own hike, or they cannot.
Just out of curiousity, what is the "clear disticntion" the ATC has to decide the difference between thruhikers and section hikers?
Wingfoot was just one guy. One guy who thru hiked and made a living sell a trailguide and despencing trail info. More than most of the people on this site can claim. At the time the best data book available for the AT. It had mistakes but so do all of the rest.
I do believe in "hike your own hike", just don't call it a thru hike if it is not a thru hike. Everyone should be pround of and enjoy their time hiking.
My question is why cant their be a defination of thru hiking. I think my defination that I took from Wingfoot is reasonable. It leaves a little wiggle room for people and seems in tune with those I have meet on the AT.
I also forgot to mention that the ATC even has a place on your 2000 miler application to check if you are a thru hiker.
CrumbSnatcher
10-27-2008, 18:08
No such thing as an "official" thru-hike. The ATC gives the "2000-miler" patch to anyone who completes the entire trail, no matter how much time it takes.
Look at it this way: if you take a week off the trail during your thru, are you suddenly doing two section hikes? How about 2 weeks off? A month? A single day? The whole debate would get a little silly.
When I finally finish on the installment plan, some time in the year 2065, I'll get the same 2000 Miler patch.
you start your hike off as a section hiker or a thruhiker(someone trying to complete in one trip) both trying to complete the trail and become a 2,000 miler. some people start off as thruhikers and become section hikers. you always hear people say i cant wait to finish so i'll be a thruhiker NO! your a thruhiker when you step onto springer or katahdin if you planned on going all the way. just my opionion always HYOH and have some fun
CrumbSnatcher
10-27-2008, 18:16
My official opinion is...365 Days or less.
this is what most think,you should be able to complete a thru in a year, even if you take alot of time off. dayhiker,section,thruhiker. nobodys better than anyone else. just get out there.
CrumbSnatcher
10-27-2008, 18:18
Throwing on your backpack and hiking terminus to terminus in a single continuous journey. nuff said
CrumbSnatcher
10-27-2008, 18:29
i have alot of respect for section hikers,year after year, all the logistics and hard work to keep getting out there to get it done. most section hikers have alot more going on in thier life back home than i ever did and they hike when they can.
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 18:31
a thru-hike is just a bunch of section hikes strung together
CrumbSnatcher
10-27-2008, 18:32
a thru-hike is just a bunch of section hikes strung together
i can go with that!
Not trying to go off topic, but questions like this make me not want to attempt a thru hike of the AT.
I remember this topic being debated on the trail in the 70's and 80's. I can't believe it is still going on. For what it's worth, it ment doing the entire trail at one shot. YO-YO's were accepted, as were short medical recuperations and emergencys. Same for short family crisis, special events and short side trips. Key word was short, perhaps a week, maybe two. Taking a job for a few days or a week along the way was accepted also, as long as it was along the trail. The point was that a thru hiker lived out of his pack from the time he started until the time he finished. But, like I said, it was a topic of debate back than, just like it is today.
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 18:46
questions like this make me not want to attempt a thru hike of the AT.
when you go to a buffwt do you try to eat it all in one sitting?
Lone Wolf
10-27-2008, 18:47
when you go to a buffwt do you try to eat it all in one sitting?
meant buffet
when you go to a buffwt do you try to eat it all in one sitting?
If you take a few breaks during the day, does it mean that you are "only" a dayhiker? ;)
when you go to a buffwt do you try to eat it all in one sitting?
Well, if you get up and leave and come back a few hours later, do you get in for free?
This is an argument that ATC is very smart to avoid. There will probably be no universally agreed on answer and I doubt there should be.
Not trying to go off topic, but questions like this make me not want to attempt a thru hike of the AT.
Why would you let a question on the 'net stop you from thru hiking the AT? Why friggin' care about what other people say or think about your hike.
Words have meanings, that why we have dictionaries.
Is thru-hike in the dictionary?
Is thru-hike in the dictionary?
Yes it is ....Thru-hike (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=thru-hiker)
Homer&Marje
10-27-2008, 20:54
A thru hike is a hike that when "YOU" feel like your done, your thru. So be it 5 miles or 5000. 5 days or 500.
Maybe someone said it, in some park rulebooks I have read, certain numbers of shelter spots are reserved for "Thru" hikers, and the total mileage to attain that status has to be over 100 miles "straight thru".
Not sure on how valid that is... country wide.
Jim Adams
10-27-2008, 22:28
terminus to terminus in one trip....40 days-40 weeks-40 months-40years...what does it matter as long as your out there? Just my opinion.
geek
Lone Wolf
10-28-2008, 05:37
what does it matter as long as your out there? Just my opinion.
geek
it matters to the judgemental patch wearers at the gatherings
Why would you let a question on the 'net stop you from thru hiking the AT? Why friggin' care about what other people say or think about your hike.
Ding Ding de Ding. We have a winner.
Cookerhiker
10-28-2008, 08:01
I don't believe in any legalisms here, not in the context of hiking and enjoying the outdoors. Sure, I have my concept of what I consider a thru hike but it's not like a eternal principle that should govern the universe. And if there's 1% who consider, for example, that my taking 27 years to finish the AT is a "thru-hike" under their definition, I'll politely disagree but I won't press the point - no big deal. Outside the Trail community when I tell non-hikers that I hiked the entire AT, I always add "...but not in one trip - over many years. Some people thruhike - covering the whole trail in one hike."
I consider that I did an "end-to-end" hike of the Long Trail last year but did I under some definitions? I hiked the entire LT within 1 month's time but the hike started in the middle, hiked north to Canade then south from Rt. 4 to Mass. In between, I did flip-flops within flip-flops and covered some stretches via slackpacking.
How wide or tall or large does a mug need to be to be to officially qualify as a bowl or jug or pot?
To be straight forward though, I would personally consider it a thru-hike if I hiked the AT from Springer to Katahdin without staying indoors, and without taking more than one day off per week. If I blue-blazed here or there I would still consider it a thru-hike, as long as the total distance and difficulty was comparable. To each his own. I wouldn't be too fussy about the time, but I would like to see my phyical and mental and 'spiritual' health and fitness improve over time, God willing. But intent wouldn't be so much to slow down the aging process as it would be to speed up the living process. If that could be better achieved by section hiking, rather than thru-hiking, then section hiking it would be. That might be the most practical way for me. Or perhaps just keep kicking about the woods here at home, but get out more often.
max patch
10-28-2008, 09:03
Why was this thread moved from Straight Forward? Shouldn't the off topic posts have been deleted instead in accordance with the rules of the Straight Forward forum?
Easier to move it maybe, and perhaps because it was a rhetorical question that defies a straightforward answer.
Why would you let a question on the 'net stop you from thru hiking the AT? Why friggin' care about what other people say or think about your hike.
I have hiked on the AT, and I know what a huge community there is, and how people are "purists" and obsess about their and other people's packweight and who's doing what and where and how many rocks are going to be in PA and on and on. There are thousands of miles in this country where you can just walk and not have 1 K people be analyzing it somewhere.
I meant what I said in a larger context, meaning, who cares what "definitions" of yes rhetorical questions are.
When you are on the AT the community and "culture" are a huge part of walking the path, and unless you hike in the winter or hike 35 miles a day, neither of which I'll do, you are going to be surrounded by it!!!
I started my "thru hike" at age 63 (observed my 64th birthday two weeks later) after 40 years at a mostly desk job, punctuated by five or six weekend or weeklong backpacks a year.
Among my reasons were to see the southern Appalachians after mostly hiking only Maine and New England, so I spent quite a bit of time in Georgia and North Carolina just looking around.
I had two physical problems:
A swollen big toe in North Carolina diagnosed as a staff infection, though similar episodes since suggest it was probably gout.
A painful irritated nerve that made it almost impossible to lay down in Pennsyvania and New York that forced a 10 day break.
IN addition to a lot of blue-blazed loop trails to shelters, historic sites and scenic overlooks, I by passed southern New England in hopes of climbing Katahdin (for probably the 20th time) before snow closed the mountain.
I haven't applied for a 2,000 mile patch. But somehow when I reached the summit of Katahdin on October 16 in 1993 after six months and three days on the trail, I absolutely felt like a thru hiker.
Weary
winfoot was just one guy. he hasn't hiked since 92. his so-called definition means squat
Lone Wolf what is your defination of the term "Thru Hike". I have seen you use "Thru Hike" on other threads.
Lone Wolf
10-28-2008, 14:32
Lone Wolf what is your defination of the term "Thru Hike". I have seen you use "Thru Hike" on other threads.
starting at one end, carrying your pack the whole way, no days off and finishing at the other end
starting at one end, carrying your pack the whole way, no days off and finishing at the other end
No days off! Dear god, man. By that definition, I would guess there would be less than 100 thruhikers ever. Ouch. No days off!
When you hiked did not take one day off?
Jack Tarlin
10-28-2008, 14:49
Wolf's messing with you.
By that definition, there probably aren't ANY thru-hikers, never mind a hundred. :D
starting at one end, carrying your pack the whole way, no days off and finishing at the other end
That is a purist definition. I wonder if anyone has ever hiked the AT and met those requirements. I know my 07 thru hike sure did not, I did walk by every white blaze to the best of my knowledge. Even my definition is more relaxed.
This topic will be debaited until the end of time. But it never hurts to revisit it every once in a while.
Always fun talking about the trail no matter what the topic. Even more fun getting out their hiking. I am Thinking about thru hike the Old Loggers Path in PA this weekend. I will even use Lone Wolfs defination. Pretty easy to do on a 27 mile trail.
:D
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=26271&highlight=2000+poster
Lone Wolf
10-28-2008, 15:09
No days off! Dear god, man. By that definition, I would guess there would be less than 100 thruhikers ever. Ouch. No days off!
When you hiked did not take one day off?
i never claimed to be a thru-hiker
If giving up my days off in a hotel watching golf or baseball means not being called a thruhiker, than so be it. I'd rather watch the final round of the Open.
99 percent of the hiking community will still consider you a thru hiker so do not worry about it. Have fun and "hike your own hike"
NorseWoman
10-28-2008, 15:26
Well, now that that's all clear I'll guess I'll just HMOH
Thanks for all opinions, I was unaware of the ATC's no time limit for the 2000 miler patch
Nana
Blue Jay
10-29-2008, 12:47
Well, now that that's all clear I'll guess I'll just HMOH
Thanks for all opinions, I was unaware of the ATC's no time limit for the 2000 miler patch
Nana
Actually there is a time limit. You have to complete it before you die. Hiking while dead is RIGHT OUT.
My thoughts: If you take the word "thru-hike" as a defination and not as a physicle experience than I think you have it. Every one of us who started from Springer or Katahdin with a pack on our back were in the process of a thru-hike. It's the process of doing, not the end result.
I first attempted to thru-hike the first time and got to Fontana and had to leave the trail do to an injury. The next spring I restarted at Fontana, after being off the trail for 11 months, and hiked for 2000 miles to finish the AT. Am I not someone who has thru-hiked? I think I am.:-?
I think it would be good to point out that the ATC does not recognize thru hiking vs section hiking vs how long it takes. You get a certificate when you have hiked the whole trail, period.
Aside from official desinations, I would say in my own personal oppinion, a thru hike means doing the whole trail in one hiking season. Basically, do it all in one trip.
David
Random thoughts...
I think a hiker is only a thru hiker for only a very tiny instant in time, the moment when he touches the sign on Katahdin or Springer. Up until then he is only someone attempting to thru hike. After that moment, he's only someone who has thru hiked but is no longer.
So ha! No thru hikers! :-P
Yes it is ....Thru-hike (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=thru-hiker)
Urban dictionary? I have to think about that. Who the hell is Dana Lemieux?
I dunno, never heard of him, LOL
Sounds like a hockey player.
Gray Blazer
10-30-2008, 13:38
starting at one end, carrying your pack the whole way, no days off and finishing at the other end
If you guys get someone to sponser me, I'll do that.
Seriously!
Lone Wolf
10-30-2008, 13:40
If you guys get someone to sponser me, I'll do that.
Seriously!
no you wouldn't. trust me
Gray Blazer
10-30-2008, 13:42
no you wouldn't. trust me
I'm pretty stubborn. Just get me the sponser.
Homer&Marje
10-30-2008, 15:56
I'm pretty stubborn. Just get me the sponser.
Hell if you get a sponsor me and Marje will go:D Time to try out that shower system for the woods I've been thinking of.
This is a great topic actually! I was wondering the same thing, because I am definitely planning on getting of the trail for a few days in places like DC, NYC, and the like.
This is a great topic actually! I was wondering the same thing, because I am definitely planning on getting of the trail for a few days in places like DC, NYC, and the like.
A "label" isn't going to impact your hike. Hike when you want, go where you want. The only people who will have anything negative to say about your hike are those who have a "2000 miler patch" on their chest and a "chip" on their shoulders.
Enjoy your hike! :sun
Lone Wolf
10-30-2008, 17:37
i just ordered 6 patches and certificates. can't wait for the next Gathering