PDA

View Full Version : Yellow Blazing...



Hammock Hanger
07-05-2004, 08:21
Are you still in the thru-hiker catagory if you yellow blazed:

less then 10 miles

just skipped up a shelter or two

only skipped one state

hey, if I yellow blaze it's my business and what's the difference in 2000 miles and 2178 miles...

Hammock Hanger
07-05-2004, 08:32
I posted the above just to see how some of my fellow members felt on the Yellow Blaze. I have read all the discussions on Blue Blazing and a lot of hikers feel it is okay to Blue Blaze, so is there a different feeling when a car is involved? -- I know a number of hikers that have skipped a "small state here or there" and then saw their name in the ATN as "thru hikers". I have talked to a few hikers who have YB and they felt that they were just as much a thru-hiker as everyone else because after hiking a total of 1900-2000 miles it would be crazy to see a difference or quibble over a "few" miles.

I know how all the PURISTS feel but how do those who think blue-blazing is okay, you are ACTUALLY HIKING, feel about the YBer?

Lone Wolf
07-05-2004, 08:45
Yellow, blue, white... it's all good. Miss Janet made a shirt with that line on it. Who cares what anyone does except the type A purists?

Blue Jay
07-05-2004, 08:45
Wow, people think I'm a trouble maker. Why try to stur up a hornets nest of anger for absolutely no valid reason? Why does Hike Your Own Hike have soooo many who want you to hike their hike? What business is it of anyone what miles anyone else hikes?
Just have fun yourself, is that so hard?

Lone Wolf
07-05-2004, 08:48
HYOH is the most meaningless statement made on the AT. Those who say it don't practice what they preach. Too worried about the other guy.
I love when I leave a shelter area in the morning AFTER the big mile purists but arrive at the next shelter area BEFORE them. You can see that they're pissed especially if you have beer and other goodies. :D

smokymtnsteve
07-05-2004, 09:03
Wow, people think I'm a trouble maker.


you are blue jay :p

Youngblood
07-05-2004, 09:06
Are you still in the thru-hiker catagory if you yellow blazed:

less then 10 miles

just skipped up a shelter or two

only skipped one state

hey, if I yellow blaze it's my business and what's the difference in 2000 miles and 2178 miles...

I think in this case it is appropriate to answer your question(s) with a question and that question is "Do you think that a thru-hike is a recreational activity or do you think that it is a competitive event?". If you think it is a competitive event, then your questions are valid and should be decided by the officiating crew assigned to that event. If you think that it is a recreational activity, then I would argue that it falls under the doctrine of "hike your own hike" and that it shouldn't be anyone else's business.

I didn't notice an officiating crew the year that I did my recreational thru-hike, but they could have been there and I just didn't noticed them. (I have seen some events where I thought the officiating crew tried to use a stealth approach to keep participants honest.)

Youngblood

Youngblood
07-05-2004, 09:12
HYOH is the most meaningless statement made on the AT. Those who say it don't practice what they preach. Too worried about the other guy.
I love when I leave a shelter area in the morning AFTER the big mile purists but arrive at the next shelter area BEFORE them. You can see that they're pissed especially if you have beer and other goodies. :D

Wolf, I believe you when you say the purist gets pissed. But do you think it is more because they think you cheated or is it a realization that you are having more fun than them?

Youngblood

smokymtnsteve
07-05-2004, 09:14
your considered a "thru-hiker" for permit purposes in the GSMNP if you begin and end your hike 50 miles outside the park.

Lone Wolf
07-05-2004, 09:17
BOTH, Youngblood.

Hammock Hanger
07-05-2004, 09:20
First let me state I am in a quirky mood and felt like stiring up a little trouble. Not my usual thing mind you but occasionally it is fun to step out of the box.

Second let me say I had a bet with myself that LW would be the first to respond!! :)

Thirdly I never thought that hiking was a competative sport until I began my thu-hike, boy was that a rude awakening... It is very competative! (if you let it be - I learned to walk away.)

Fourthly, I really think there are many ways to enjoy a hike... However, I will publicly state that I do not believe that getting into a car and skipping an entire state falls into the realm of a "thru-hike". A great adventure, a long distance hike... No I'm not a pure purist but I guess I have my limits. But then I am not going to be the one standing on Kathadin and checking out everyone's milage either.

So why did the "quiet" hiker in me start this??? Mmmmmmmmm Guess I'll have to revert to the first part of this post.... (Got ya all stirred up and you all replied so FAST!.) Sue/HH

smokymtnsteve
07-05-2004, 09:23
Hiker chicks gone wild?? :D :jump

Jaybird
07-05-2004, 09:35
Are you still in the thru-hiker catagory if you yellow blazed:less then 10 miles..just skipped up a shelter or two..only skipped one state..hey, if I yellow blaze it's my business and what's the difference in 2000 miles and 2178 miles...




HH


i thought YELLOW-BLAZIN' was peeing on a tree with a White Blaze on it!
hehehehehehehe

AND the difference between 2000 miles & 2178 miles is.....drumroll please...

178 miles!

(you had to know that wuz coming!)

Youngblood
07-05-2004, 09:37
Thirdly I never thought that hiking was a competative sport until I began my thu-hike, boy was that a rude awakening... It is very competative! (if you let it be - I learned to walk away.)


HH, I didn't have that feeling when I did my thru-hike. I was perfectly content to hike my own hike and the folks that I hiked with did the same. Maybe I was just igorant to it being an issue and any discussions/arguments somehow where not particularly noticed by me. If that was the case, then I'm glad... sometimes ignorance is a blessing.

Youngblood

Hammock Hanger
07-05-2004, 10:20
Competative... If you didn't experience it then I am happy for you. It was mainly in the early days. Mostly shelter talk, I hike more miles then you, my pack is lighter then yours, I have nice gear because it is a brand name, I have better gear because it is lighter, therefore I can hike more miles then you, etc, etc. I mean some of the first things I would be asked when I hit a shelter was how many miles had I hiked and how much did my pack weigh. Then it would be well I hiked ..... yada yada. Most of it seemed to die out as we all got into the hike more. Though there was still talk about milage through out most of the hike. Maybe I took the numbers game/conversation as competative when it wasn't but I have to tell you it sure seemed it. And yes, sometimes ignorance is a blessing and I often don't mind being the dumb ass. :)

Sue/HH

Hammock Hanger
07-05-2004, 10:28
HH


i thought YELLOW-BLAZIN' was peeing on a tree with a White Blaze on it!
hehehehehehehe

:-? hmmmmm, guess that puts me right in there with them YBer's!! Cuz I know I spray a tree or two along the way... HH

hungryhowie
07-05-2004, 23:15
Here's the definative answer (which I know you already know).

First of all, according to the Appalachian Trail Conference (ATC), the governing body over the Appalachian Trail (AT), there is no such thing as a thruhiker. The ATC recognizes those who have done the entire AT as "2000-milers", a term, they say, is used for tradition (the approximate original length of the AT) and convenience (it would be silly to change it as the trail changes each season...and difficult to keep up with). The ATC's recognition policy does not consider issues such as the "sequence, direction, speed or whether one carries a pack."

The ATC does expect, however, that "persons applying for inclusion in our 2,000-miler records have made an honest effort to walk the entire Trail."

The only separation of section hiker and thruhiker that I have ever seen the ATC make is on the 2000-miler form in which they ask you to chose whether your hike was a section hike (designated as "more than 1 year") and a thruhike (presuably less than 1 year, but not labeled as such).

Therefore, if you make an honest effort to walk the entire AT you are a 2000-miler in the eyes of the ATC, the only body which has the power to designate you as such.

How much of the trail can you miss and still claim that you made an honest effort to walk the entire trail? I think that's a question that each person must answer for him/herself.

-Howie

Lone Wolf
07-05-2004, 23:41
Like I said, the ATC should not recognize, applaud, award or acknowledge end to enders. It's just a recreational hiking path.

Youngblood
07-06-2004, 08:43
Back to yellow blazing for a moment, which was the original question on this thread. Consider the following:

You are doing a nobo thru-hike and want to go to the town of Franklin, NC for a resupply. At mile 106.8, you get to US64 at Winding Stair Gap. You hitch a ride east, 10 miles into Franklin and do your resupply. You now hitch a ride back to Winding Stair Gap, get out on the north side of the road and resume your thru-hike without walking back and forth across US64. Which of the following statements do you believe?

1) You are now a yellow blazer because you didn't walk across the road.
2) You are now not worthy of calling yourself a thru-hiker.
3) You are now not eligible for a '2000 Miler Certificate of Congratulations'.
4) It don't make a bit of difference in anything.
5) Only a fool would concern themselves with such nonsense.

And remember, if you answer anything except 4 or 5, you will be faced with these type of decisions every day. Don't believe it? If you feel you have to hike the AT in its entirety, then anytime you leave the trail you must make sure you return to a point that was further back than were you left it or you cannot be certain that you hiked it in its entirety. How can you be sure? Beats the heck out of me unless you leave a marker designating where you got off the trail and are sure to depart the trail north of the marker (for nobo'ers) and return to the trail south of that marker. Anything less than that is a liberal interpretation of the word 'entire'... and you are force to use terms like 'honest effort' and such. Now, go back to the list of questions again. For some folks, all of this can get rather ridiculous for a recreational activity... especially one that lasts for over 2000 miles.

Just something to think about.

Youngblood

Hammock Hanger
07-06-2004, 09:56
4) It don't make a bit of difference in anything.
5) Only a fool would concern themselves with such nonsense.
...all of this can get rather ridiculous for a recreational activity... especially one that lasts for over 2000 miles.

Just something to think about. Youngblood



I agree with what you have to say regarding being to the extreme. I believe that the hardcore touch every white blaze purist and the I'll hitch a ride up the trail 100 mile or so yellow blazer are at both ends of the extreme, and that most hiker fall somewhere in between. I think it really all comes down to labels. If we are all out hiking, doing our own thing and having fun our way while hiking the trail why must there be labels?


I think the controversy comes when the label of "thru-hiker" is put out there carrying the definition that the person is hiking the entire trail from GA to ME or ME to GA. I know as stated above some do not believe there is a definition but others would disagree. I believe that most hikers admit it or not have made a few infractions here or there. I think those that tried to hike the full trail feel a bit slighted when someone who skipped a state or two when the going got tough gets the same accolades. In reality I think it all comes back to the “thru-hiker” label. If there weren't such intensity put into the label "thru-hiker" there wouldn't be such controversy. All hikers are hiking "thru" the woods, some for 10 miles, some for 100 miles and some for 2000+ miles. Of course there are the "thrus" who didn't do it for the label and could care less. (I truly applauded those hikers; they are the true AT hikers.) Then there are those that pushed themselves to their very limits for the label. For most I think the hike is a recreational activity (a long one) and for others it is a way of testing their moxie, and doing it in a pure form helps them from cutting corners. Once you take a shortcut it gets easier and easier the next time.


I could go on an on but like all things there is always going to be two sides. I would love it if there were no labels out there but like it or not there are. The thing is that the hiker has to decide what label he will carry and be comfortable with.


Funny thing about labels... I myself was never a person who felt I fit any label I am very diversified. I never wanted to be labeled! Then this whole "thru-hike" thing came into my life and I worked hard for that LABEL!! Why? Why did I all of a sudden in my 45th year of life feel a need to chase after a label... beats the hell out of me. When pain won out and I knew I could not wear that moniker I was upset, again why? When I returned to the trail the next year and I was asked if I was a "thru" and I had to state no I’m a section hiker I felt less than... why? I did see some hikers and some trail angels treat me different. It didn't matter I had just hiked 400, 600, 800 miles, I wasn't a thru. Maybe, just maybe it was that feeling that made me want the label. I will say that there were also many who accepted me into the hiker community and didn’t give a hoot how many miles I had hiked. When I got home and had time to think about it I laugh and thought to myself, was I hiking for the label or for the love of hiking... For me it had always been for the love of hiking.


I can't speak for every hiker but I can speak for a number that I have spoken with that this draw, desire for the label is strong and for some that means following the unwritten rules of hiking the entire trail and anything less is not a thru-hike. Thus other labels begin to emerge Blue, yellow, gray blazers, etc etc.


It has taken me a long time (3 years) to come to terms with my hike, my lack of making it in one year, of not having the coveted “thru-hiker” label. This summer when I head out I feel confident that I can be comfortable in my own skin once again and be happy with myself, the hiker. People can label me a section hiker, a long distance hiker… whatever. I have finally come to terms with it and can now revert to my normal way of life and say that there is really no label that fits me. Hell I may even yellow blaze…;)


I have no idea what I am rambling about… this all just seemed to come spilling out of me as I started to reply to this post and thought it may be therapeutic to type it out. Who better to have a “therapy session” with then my fellow hikers? I think this is by far one of the very longest posts I have ever written. If you made it this far down the page, thanks for listening. I feel pretty good. Mmmmm so that is why all those people actually pay someone to listen to them. Hope none of you plan on sending me a bill…:o


Sue/HH

Jaybird
07-06-2004, 10:37
Back to yellow blazing for a moment, which was the original question on this thread. Consider the following:

You are doing a nobo thru-hike and want to go to the town of Franklin, NC for a resupply. At mile 106.8, you get to US64 at Winding Stair Gap. You hitch a ride east, 10 miles into Franklin and do your resupply. You now hitch a ride back to Winding Stair Gap, get out on the north side of the road and resume your thru-hike without walking back and forth across US64. Which of the following statements do you believe?

1) You are now a yellow blazer because you didn't walk across the road.
2) You are now not worthy of calling yourself a thru-hiker.
3) You are now not eligible for a '2000 Miler Certificate of Congratulations'.
4) It don't make a bit of difference in anything.
5) Only a fool would concern themselves with such nonsense.

And remember, if you answer anything except 4 or 5, you will be faced with these type of decisions every day. Don't believe it? If you feel you have to hike the AT in its entirety, then anytime you leave the trail you must make sure you return to a point that was further back than were you left it or you cannot be certain that you hiked it in its entirety. How can you be sure? Beats the heck out of me unless you leave a marker designating where you got off the trail and are sure to depart the trail north of the marker (for nobo'ers) and return to the trail south of that marker. Anything less than that is a liberal interpretation of the word 'entire'... and you are force to use terms like 'honest effort' and such. Now, go back to the list of questions again. For some folks, all of this can get rather ridiculous for a recreational activity... especially one that lasts for over 2000 miles.Just something to think about.Youngblood




WOW! this conversation could be compared to the hiker that thought:...if he took off his backpack while hikin'...he wasn't a "true thru-hiker!"

Hammock Hanger
07-06-2004, 10:59
WOW! this conversation could be compared to the hiker that thought:...if he took off his backpack while hikin'...he wasn't a "true thru-hiker!"
You mean I stopped being a thru hiker when I stopped and took my pack off on Springer to take picturers??? Dang, if I had known that I could have saved myself a lot of anxiety and therapy....:jump Sue/HH

Grampie
07-06-2004, 11:48
undefined

Sue / Hamock Hanger,

Gal, To know you is to love you.

From the trail,
Grampie :clap

MedicineMan
07-06-2004, 22:30
been following this thread among others on the different colors of blazing...just want all of you to know that here in the hospital we have a special floor just for you, a simple door key wont get you in or out, and the pass codes for the door locks are changed every shift. there are two doors that lead in or out and both are made of lead and 3 inch glass that is reinforced with steel bands, after we get you are admitted to this floor you will be haldolized and then maintained on geodon, concerns of whether you walked back across the road will never cross your mind.

Noggin
07-06-2004, 22:34
been following this thread among others on the different colors of blazing...just want all of you to know that here in the hospital we have a special floor just for you, a simple door key wont get you in or out, and the pass codes for the door locks are changed every shift. there are two doors that lead in or out and both are made of lead and 3 inch glass that is reinforced with steel bands, after we get you are admitted to this floor you will be haldolized and then maintained on geodon, concerns of whether you walked back across the road will never cross your mind.
ROFLMAO:jump :jump

Streamweaver
07-06-2004, 22:49
been following this thread among others on the different colors of blazing...just want all of you to know that here in the hospital we have a special floor just for you, a simple door key wont get you in or out, and the pass codes for the door locks are changed every shift. there are two doors that lead in or out and both are made of lead and 3 inch glass that is reinforced with steel bands, after we get you are admitted to this floor you will be haldolized and then maintained on geodon, concerns of whether you walked back across the road will never cross your mind. LOL I hear they also give you one of those nice jackets with the sleeves that tie in the back!!

SGT Rock
07-06-2004, 23:02
LOL I hear they also give you one of those nice jackets with the sleeves that tie in the back!!

Will that jacket go with the hats that have the bill on the back? :confused:

I see people wearing them all the time, but mine only come with the bill on the front. :-?

Hammock Hanger
07-06-2004, 23:03
Please doc, don't put me in there I'm not crazy...... :bse I'm just a hiker gone mad!!:jump Sue/HH

MisterSweetie
07-06-2004, 23:07
Someone mentioned gray blazing. What's that?

Streamweaver
07-06-2004, 23:26
Will that jacket go with the hats that have the bill on the back? :confused:

I see people wearing them all the time, but mine only come with the bill on the front. :-? NO NO Sarge ,your wearing them backwards!! You know your wearing them the right way when you get that little half moon shaped sunburn right in the middle of your forehead!! Streamweaver

SGT Rock
07-07-2004, 00:58
Ohhh, my bad.

Hammock Hanger
07-07-2004, 08:17
Someone mentioned gray blazing. What's that?
Actually I hadn't heard of this one until this year. Then I read about it in two different journals. Taking the bus, as in Grayhound. Sue/HH

MisterSweetie
07-07-2004, 12:24
Aah, thanks Sue/HH. Never even crossed my mind.

Smooth03
07-08-2004, 22:14
It seems like there is a general feeling, one which I hold, that the whole "purist" vs"YB" argument is rather inane because I know I can say for myself that I did my thru-hike for my own reasons and could care less what others were doing it for. If they got the most out of skipping the occasional few miles, then so be it. I got the most out of not skipping those miles but like I said, it was my hike.

That being said, what did make me upset is when people who had skipped SIGNIFICANT portions(i.e. states, 100's of miles) would take advantage of the hostels, homes, trail magic, and general good will that people put out under the idea that it is going towards "thru-hikers". Right or wrong, most people who opened up their hearts to me did it because they felt I was being sincere in what they thought was a significant feat(following the 2 by 6 inch blazes). Anything else and you're simply taking advantage of people's goodwill(i.e. the bum on the corner who looks pitiful). Is it fair for me to go down to the food pantry and beg for food because I decided to spend my last dollar on a bottle of whiskey? I think this is a relavent metaphor.
I've read that people claim most YBs thought the term "thru-hiking" as insigificant and possibly even "elitist". But if that is true why did I hear so many YBs say they were "thru-hiking"? Because even to those who claim not to care about the 50 miles they skipped probably do. And thats the sad part. Because they really shouldn't care about them.

Rain Man
07-09-2004, 09:24
It seems like there is a general feeling, one which I hold, that the whole "purist" vs"YB" argument is rather inane ...

I agree. Some of the discussion is very inane and even mean.



That being said, what did make me upset is when people ... would take advantage of the hostels, homes, trail magic, and general good will that people put out under the idea that it is going towards "thru-hikers". ...

I don't necessarily agree with this premise. It strikes me a little like the old question of "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" That is, based on a possibly false premise to begin with.

The false premise being that all these good people know with precision who is and is not a "thru-hiker" and intended their gifts to be only for a "thru-hiker." I don't quite buy that that hostels, homes, trail magic, and general good will is intended for the very, very few "true" thru-hikers. I believe in the premise that they are intended for all sorts of hikers, especially "long-distance hikers," and I think anyone hiking a long distance most likely isn't "taking advantage" of these services.

So, IMHO the problem isn't defining with a high degree of inaneness the qualifying hiker, but rather with some general vague goodness the intent of the angels offering helpfulness. Clear as mud?

Your mileage may vary.
:sun
Rain Man

.

gravityman
07-09-2004, 10:03
It seems like there is a general feeling, one which I hold, that the whole "purist" vs"YB" argument is rather inane because I know I can say for myself that I did my thru-hike for my own reasons and could care less what others were doing it for. If they got the most out of skipping the occasional few miles, then so be it. I got the most out of not skipping those miles but like I said, it was my hike.

That being said, what did make me upset is when people who had skipped SIGNIFICANT portions(i.e. states, 100's of miles) would take advantage of the hostels, homes, trail magic, and general good will that people put out under the idea that it is going towards "thru-hikers". Right or wrong, most people who opened up their hearts to me did it because they felt I was being sincere in what they thought was a significant feat(following the 2 by 6 inch blazes). Anything else and you're simply taking advantage of people's goodwill(i.e. the bum on the corner who looks pitiful). Is it fair for me to go down to the food pantry and beg for food because I decided to spend my last dollar on a bottle of whiskey? I think this is a relavent metaphor.
I've read that people claim most YBs thought the term "thru-hiking" as insigificant and possibly even "elitist". But if that is true why did I hear so many YBs say they were "thru-hiking"? Because even to those who claim not to care about the 50 miles they skipped probably do. And thats the sad part. Because they really shouldn't care about them.

Ah, so section hikers aren't entitled to any of these "gifts" reserved for the ELITE thru-hiker?

Gesh!

Gravity Man

Tramper Al
07-09-2004, 10:22
Ah, so section hikers aren't entitled to any of these "gifts" reserved for the ELITE thru-hiker?
Yes, my understanding is that the hike itself is the true reward. Who thinks that anyone is 'entitled' to anything more, or anything less, than the rest of us?

MOWGLI
07-09-2004, 11:12
That being said, what did make me upset is when people who had skipped SIGNIFICANT portions(i.e. states, 100's of miles) would take advantage of the hostels, homes, trail magic, and general good will that people put out under the idea that it is going towards "thru-hikers". Right or wrong, most people who opened up their hearts to me did it because they felt I was being sincere in what they thought was a significant feat(following the 2 by 6 inch blazes). Anything else and you're simply taking advantage of people's goodwill(i.e. the bum on the corner who looks pitiful). Is it fair for me to go down to the food pantry and beg for food because I decided to spend my last dollar on a bottle of whiskey? I think this is a relavent metaphor.


Smooth, I don't believe that thru-hikers are any "better" or "more important" than any other hiker out on the trail. Quite frankly, I am amazed that someone could hike 2170+ miles and come to the conclusions that you have. I'll chalk that up to your youth. BTW, I am exactly 20 years older than you (to the day).

99.99% of the people who are not Appalachian Trail hikers could care less about this silly conversation. You will also not find this argument, to this extent anyway, associated with any other trail.

I have given many slideshow presentations to a wide variety of groups. People just don't care about this whole white blaze versus blue blaze business. I have explained to large groups some of the notions that have been put forth by some in our community. The idea that going in & out of a shelter loop (and skipping perhaps .1 or .2 of the white blazes) would disqualify someone from thru-hiker status was met with howling laughter. The notion that fording the Kennebec would render you a section hiker, regardless of whether you had passed every other white blaze was met with looks of incredulity.

I was at a presentation recently when a couple who thru-hiked in 2003 admitted to skipping 20 miles of the trail. The people in the audience laughed and rolled their eyes, and said mockingly, "well, I guess that makes you cheaters". That remark was followed by hearty laughter.

If someone opens up a hostel for hikers, it is open for all, the section hiker, the weekend warrier, and the thru-hiker. Similarly, if anyone needs to check a hikers "credentials" before offering them a beverage, a piece of fruit, or a burger... Well, I wouldn't want to spend 30 seconds dealing with someone like that. If it's hot and you want to offer a hiker a little refreshment or nourishment, why would anyone be concerned about the nature of that individuals hike? Lone Wolf has talked about someone at Fontana Dam that refused him a burger because he was not a "thru-hiker". While that may be one individuals prerogative, I think that decision say alot about that person's character. When someone "opens up their heart"*, there should be no asterisk next to that statement.

*I will gladly let you stay in my hostel or give you a drink, as long as you haven't skipped "significant" portions of the white blazes.

BTW, for the record, during my thru-hike in 2000, I skipped a 15-20 mile section in Sterling Forest, NY. That's an area where I have led many hikes, and participated in biological research. I chose to spend the time with my family instead. I also walked the ski run at Wildcat due to an electrical storm, and took a ride along the 1 mile road walk by the Androscoggin River near Gorham, NH. I say this all so you know exactly where I am coming from (full disclosure). FYI, I completed this hike in 5.5 months, and was lectured on this site by a purist that his 7-month hike that passed every blaze was "more difficult".

One last comment... How come you never hear this purist argument from the female hikers among us? This appears to be a "guy" thing. Any women care to answer that question?

Happy hiking to all! I'm going to the beach!

Little Bear

Tramper Al
07-09-2004, 11:28
The notion that fording the Kennebec would render you a section hiker, regardless of whether you had passed every other white blaze was met with looks of incredulity.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand this notion at all. A section hiker is one who hikes the trail over the course of more than one calendar year, yes? Another form of section hiker might restrict himself/herself to some fraction of the full trail, one or more states for instance.

Being 'rendered' or otherwise reduced to the status of section hiker has nothing at all to do with missing blazes, does it? Has no one ever met a purist white-blazing section hiker?

You can probably guess that I see section hikers as no less worthy than thru-hikers. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that anyone who sets foot on the trail, be it a purist yo-yo or a 'tourist' stepping out of a rental car, that we all have the same right to be there.

MOWGLI
07-09-2004, 11:39
I'm sorry, but I don't understand this notion at all.

Al, there are some who have have stated that since the ferry is the "official" route, that if you skipped the ferry, you are no longer a thru-hiker.

We are in agreement. I don't understand that "logic" either.

Tramper Al
07-09-2004, 12:05
Al, there are some who have have stated that since the ferry is the "official" route, that if you skipped the ferry, you are no longer a thru-hiker.

We are in agreement. I don't understand that "logic" either.
I actually don't think that we do agree, or at least I haven't made my point well.

In my opinion, skipping past any white blazes on a canoe or a tree (and not going back, or intending to go back) means that you are no longer a purist white-blazer, but that's not my point. And you can care about being a white-blaze purist or not, that's up to the individual, obviously. Also, not my point.

Skipping white blazes does not, however, 'reduce' you to being a section hiker. Further, I contend that being a section hiker is not a reduction in status, and that section hiking need not imply any blue- or yellow-blazing at all. The issues are entirely different. Am I wrong? This is my point.

SavageLlama
07-09-2004, 12:16
In my opinion, skipping past any white blazes on a canoe or a tree (and not going back, or intending to go back) means that you are no longer a purist white-blazer
Actually, the ATC painted a white blaze on the canoe that crosses the Kennebec River in Maine.

So technically, you are skipping a blaze if you don't take it...

Pencil Pusher
07-09-2004, 13:34
cool beans dudes

MOWGLI
07-09-2004, 14:55
In my opinion, skipping past any white blazes on a canoe or a tree (and not going back, or intending to go back) means that you are no longer a purist white-blazer.



Agreed



And you can care about being a white-blaze purist or not, that's up to the individual, obviously.

Agreed



Skipping white blazes does not, however, 'reduce' you to being a section hiker. .

Well, this is a question that needs to be answered by each individual. If you choose to skip 5, 10, 25, 50, or 500 miles, at some point you are not a thru-hiker if you have no intention of going back. Personally, I don't care what anyone does, or if they file for a certificate. It is none of my business, and it has no impact on me or my hike. Here is where purists often lodge a complaint that people are being dishonest.



Further, I contend that being a section hiker is not a reduction in status, and that section hiking need not imply any blue- or yellow-blazing at all. The issues are entirely different. Am I wrong? This is my point.

Agreed - 110%. It is far more difficult to section hike than it is to thru-hike. I tend to have greater admiration for someone who completes the trail over 20 years, than someone who does it over 5-7 months.

There is also the category of 2000-miler, which implies that you have walked all of the trail. Someone might try & take me to task for skipping a 1-mile road walk, or walking down the Wildcat ski run (it's not an official bad weather bypass). I know that I walked from Georgia to Maine, with perhaps 250-300 extra miles mixed in (to & from town, to water sources, etc...), and that is good enough for me.

I feel comfortable calling myself a thru-hiker and a 2000-miler. I don't give a darn what anyone else thinks about my hike.

BTW, my goal when I set out was to have a no regrets hike. I accomplished my goal.

Little Bear

Tramper Al
07-09-2004, 15:23
BTW, my goal when I set out was to have a no regrets hike. I accomplished my goal.
Cool. And thanks for the reply.

Smooth03
07-11-2004, 13:46
Little Bear:

"Smooth, I don't believe that thru-hikers are any "better" or "more important" than any other hiker out on the trail. Quite frankly, I am amazed that someone could hike 2170+ miles and come to the conclusions that you have. I'll chalk that up to your youth. BTW, I am exactly 20 years older than you (to the day)."

I never said, nor have believed, that section hikers are any more or less anything than thru-hikers so please don't put words in my mouth. And its also rather ignorant of you to simply assume anything I might be believe is because of my youth. Or sex for that matter.

"I have given many slideshow presentations to a wide variety of groups. People just don't care about this whole white blaze versus blue blaze business."
Yes but this is indeed an AT website so.......thats why its being discussed.



" FYI, I completed this hike in 5.5 months, and was lectured on this site by a purist that his 7-month hike that passed every blaze was "more difficult". "

Sorry to hear that. I've personally felt that its mainly a mental challenge. What I mean is my 5.5 month thruhike was rather easy because I loved every second of it. Someone who maybe isn't enjoying it but "sticks it out" to the end will have a much more dificult thru-hike.

I think you and I agree on this subject more than we think. Like I said I had friends who yellow blazed whole states and it really doesn't bother me at all. I poorly tried to make the point that I felt sometimes people would try to make themselves out to be something they weren't. Not implying that that something, thru-hiker, is better. To be honest many times I'd rather share company with a section hiker because we thru-hikers can be rather, "confident".

In terms of ameliorating the differences between section hikers and thru-hikers I think that is more dificult. While it may seem like elitism, for a thru-hiker, the AT is his/her home. So thats why they sometimes are rather pushy when it comes to things. This pissed me off as much as the next guy, but being a thru-hiker I can at least understand why thru-hikers are like that. Now, I've never done much section hiking (and never during thru-hiker season), but I can probably understand how one feels when they get to a shelter with 10 smelly, possibly arrogant, thru-hikers who may unintentionally, or intentionally, make a section hiker feel unwelcome. I agree with Little Bear in that doing the entire, or significant chunk, of the AT over years or decades is more commendable and more challenging physically and mentally than a thru-hike. But then again, what I do I know? I'm just some stupid young male, right?

MOWGLI
07-11-2004, 15:36
... And its also rather ignorant of you to simply assume anything I might be believe is because of my youth. ...I'm just some stupid young male, right?

Smooth, I don't think that I am ignorant, at least when it comes to the Appalachian Trail. Nor do I think you are stupid. I simply strongly disagree with some of the things that you posted here. I guess it was presumptuous of me to attribute your comments to your age.

Happy hiking!

Little Bear

gravityman
07-12-2004, 10:43
This "kinda" pertains to yellow balzing and this discussion...

Yesterday my wife and I hiked Long's Peak (A 14er in colorado in case you didn't know). We started off with to people that seemed a little green (jeans and video taped themselves signing into the register). Talked with them a bit, and they didn't seem to know the route very well. I tried to tell them that the route we both were planning had snow in it and we might not make it, but they didn't understand what I was talking about :) Anyway, my wife and I did make it (but some SERIOUSLY scary sections with snow that was frozen solid and a slip would have, well... anyway, we should have had ice axes, and we were stupid to do it, but it was still AMAZING!) and it took us 14 hours for 15 miles and 5,000 verticle feet (that's what class 3-4 does to your average speed BTW).

They never passed us.

When I signed out, I noticed that they said they made it! ***? No way! There is only ONE way up that mountain without ropes, and there is NO way they passed us without us noticing it. They CLEARLY didn't get to the top. There were only about 10 people that did, and only 5 went up the "easy" way.

So, clearly, this applies to the yellow blazing mentality. Why do people do that? It was TWO dudes, so they were BOTH lieing to each other, and all their friends when they got back (clearly that's why they would sign in that they finished the route, right?)

I think that THIS is the kind of yellow blazing that makes people mad, or at least fustrated. Clearly didn't accomplish the goal, clearly said they did. I mean, the rules here are MUCH simplier. If you stand on the top, you made it. If you don't, you didn't. To say you did get to the top, when you didn't? Wierd...

Anyway, I thought it strange. It didn't really make me mad (Heck, I KNEW we made it, and that is what counts). They missed one of the BEST 14er summits that I have EVERY been on. (We'd been up long's before, but the cell phone traffic made it TERRIBLE.) And they just REALLY cheated themselves.

But, it still surprises me that two people can lie to themselves and each other that they made it to the summit... wierd...

Gravity man

Lion King
08-08-2004, 14:43
Yup
HYOH is the most meaningless statement made on the AT. Those who say it don't practice what they preach. Too worried about the other guy
I love when I leave a shelter area in the morning AFTER the big mile purists but arrive at the next shelter area BEFORE them. You can see that they're pissed especially if you have beer and other goodies. :D

Yup.:dance

eyahiker
08-08-2004, 15:36
Wow. You guys are really missing the point of hiking the hike.

Did you spend 4-5months + walking the AT? Great! Celebrate!

The whole reason I hike is to get AWAY from all the nit-pick crap in everyday life, why drag it into the backcountry? This is such an old, moldy discussion.

Thanks for listening, I'll get down of of my soapbox now ( it, by the way, is NOT painted with a white blaze;) ) Happy Hiking!

Crash! Bang!
10-11-2004, 15:22
hike your own hike, but dont call yourself a thru-hiker unless youve walked every mile. anything else is dishonest. it diminishes from those who have gone through pains to meet all the requirements

Crash! Bang!
10-11-2004, 15:30
the only thing that would make doing the whole thing in sections more difficult would be the fact that you have to start fresh every time to get your hiker legs, but that is countered by the longer wear and tear of a thru-hike, plus, on a section hike, you could eliminate alot of the bad weather by starting later and finishing earlier, whereas on a thru hike youre gonna have bad weather at some point, unless you just fly, which of course adds more to the difficulty.

verdict: thru-hiking is more difficult, but that doesnt make it better. not every one can drop out of their lives for 6 months at a time

Blue Jay
10-12-2004, 07:51
hike your own hike, but dont call yourself a thru-hiker unless youve walked every mile. anything else is dishonest. it diminishes from those who have gone through pains to meet all the requirements

There always is a "but" after "hike your own hike" which negates the statement, so why even make the statement if you do not believe it? As for "requirements" please specify where these are written.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 08:44
i missed a tenth here and there on road walks due to being picked up at one spot and dropped off at another when hitching into town, i unintentionally blue-blazed or bushwacked a few dozen yards here and there due to losing the trail occasionally, i slack-packed in virginia, and i did new jersey and new york last. oh, and i did blue-blaze a shelter loop or two (small ones). so sue me. i consider myself a thru-hiker. yellow-blazers, i do not.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 09:00
There always is a "but" after "hike your own hike" which negates the statement, so why even make the statement if you do not believe it? because they are two separate issues. the issue of what one should call oneself is a separate issue from the actual doing of the hike. i am not making the "but" in the context of the hike itself, but in the context of discussing the hike. how one labels or discusses the hike does not fall under the umbrella of the actual hiking. there are two things: "the hike" and "talking about the hike". i made my "but" in the context of "talking about the hike", therefore not negating the "hike your own hike" principle.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 09:13
As for "requirements" please specify where these are written.theyre not, but its high time they should be in someplace official or at least semi-official. the hard thing to nail down would be the time frame. a calendar year? any 12 months? feb 15th (atc's deadline for recognizing 2000 milers)?

the words we use in the english language, or any language for that matter, need to have a consensus from the general population on what they mean. there needs to be uniformity of definition or no communication can occur. you cant see any large mammal in the woods and then go run and tell your friends you saw a bear, just like you cant do just any large section of the trail and say youre a thru-hiker. its really just semantics, i guess.

and yea, before you nail me, technically, im not a thru-hiker either, due to previous posting. i think it has more to do with the spirit of the thing. anyone who says missing a few tenths and missing a hundred miles is the same thing is being intellectually dishonest. i walked every mile in the woods.

kentucky
10-12-2004, 09:21
well from what I have been reading I have one thing to say!Im wandering If all the times I have taken the old white blazez for miles count?and really they were great hiking and views I just get lost somtimes and keep going foward:bse and well I guess Im not done thrue hiking! kentucky:rolleyes: just a backpacker nowadays?

Tramper Al
10-12-2004, 14:19
the only thing that would make doing the whole thing in sections more difficult would be the fact that you have to start fresh every time to get your hiker legs, but that is countered by the longer wear and tear of a thru-hike, plus, on a section hike, you could eliminate alot of the bad weather by starting later and finishing earlier, whereas on a thru hike youre gonna have bad weather at some point, unless you just fly, which of course adds more to the difficulty.

verdict: thru-hiking is more difficult, but that doesnt make it better. not every one can drop out of their lives for 6 months at a time

With respect, I disagree with this blanket conclusion.

I have actually never postponed or altered a scheduled section hike due to foul weather.

Section hiking can add more than a few miles to the trail. I have often used access trails both to and from the AT to complete a section. Usually I section hike solo, so in addition to a day's 12 miles on the AT (for example), I have to get back to my car. Some sections I end up hiking north and south both. Other times I have spotted a bike and cycled back to my car.

I'm not foolish enough to shout "VERDICT: section-hiking is more difficult". Sometimes, though, it can be tough.

Blue Jay
10-12-2004, 14:50
because they are two separate issues. the issue of what one should call oneself is a separate issue from the actual doing of the hike. i am not making the "but" in the context of the hike itself, but in the context of discussing the hike. how one labels or discusses the hike does not fall under the umbrella of the actual hiking. there are two things: "the hike" and "talking about the hike". i made my "but" in the context of "talking about the hike", therefore not negating the "hike your own hike" principle.

You should not steal your convoluted logic from the presidential debates. Clearly, it does not matter if you are talking, hiking, or typing you simply do not believe in Hike Your Own Hike. You want others to hike your idea of a hike or the almighty you declares them not to be thruhikers, a phrase that even you have admited there is no definition. Get it through your head no one, and I mean not even anal purists, cares about your definition. Verdict: Go play Golf, you can keep score there.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 14:57
i know im going to get accused of elitism here, but until youve actually done a thru-hike, you have no basis for comparison, unless youve done an exceptionally large section, for say, a month or more, doing 12-20 miles a day. do a thru-hike, or springer to damascus in 6 weeks, then we'll talk. you cant know what its like until youve done it.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:04
blue jay, the point is its really just about semantics. i dont want it to be a competition. i just think the terms we bandy about should have consistent meaning and not just mean whatever the user wants them to mean. i was an english major in college (and yes, isnt it funny i dont capitalise or use apostrophes. im just lazy about the shift key). im anal about that. however, do not presume to psychoanalyze me. you know jack-shyt about my motivations or thinking processes. i came here to get away from issue-oriented discussions always turning personal, like at trailtalk but i guess that was fool-hardy.

Bloodroot
10-12-2004, 15:09
Oh my! I have seen this same can of worms before. Glad it's not me this time...good luck!

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:12
"You should not steal your convoluted logic from the presidential debates."
didnt see the debates. i was on the trail

"a phrase that even you have admited there is no definition."

i admitted no such thing. just that the timeframe aspect is a little harder to nail down, and that its not formally written anywhere. but in the thru-hiker community, it is commonly accepted that yellow-blazing violates the spirit. not many, if any, of those who have hiked every mile would be likely to agree with you.

Tramper Al
10-12-2004, 15:16
i know im going to get accused of elitism here, but until youve actually done a thru-hike, you have no basis for comparison, unless youve done an exceptionally large section, for say, a month or more, doing 12-20 miles a day. do a thru-hike, or springer to damascus in 6 weeks, then we'll talk. you cant know what its like until youve done it.

My points were about section hiking, not thru hiking. You seem to be an expert on everything, though.

Why don't you section hike 600 miles or so, and a few hundred more on other trails, and "then we'll talk".

Please.

Youngblood
10-12-2004, 15:18
i know im going to get accused of elitism here, but until youve actually done a thru-hike, you have no basis for comparison, unless youve done an exceptionally large section, for say, a month or more, doing 12-20 miles a day. do a thru-hike, or springer to damascus in 6 weeks, then we'll talk. you cant know what its like until youve done it.

You seem to have a high opinion of your opinion. There is a difference between indisputable facts and ones opinions. Everyone is not going to have the same opinion as you on everything related to an AT thru-hike and hiking more miles doesn't make your opinion necessarily better. There are many people who have hiked lots of years on the AT and I suspect they don't agree on everything either.

Youngblood

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:21
"have actually never postponed or altered a scheduled section hike due to foul weather"

im not talking about that aspect. what i meant was, with a thru-hike, youre gonna get alot more bad weather: cold in the beginning, then rain. if you did it for 2 months a year for 3 years, then you could do all of your hiking in the nice summer months. you could go may-june or june-july, or whatever, depending on your preferences, and what section youre doing. you have a lot more flexibility with regards to scheduling.

Tramper Al
10-12-2004, 15:27
"have actually never postponed or altered a scheduled section hike due to foul weather"

im not talking about that aspect. what i meant was, with a thru-hike, youre gonna get alot more bad weather: cold in the beginning, then rain. if you did it for 2 months a year for 3 years, then you could do all of your hiking in the nice summer months. you could go may-june or june-july, or whatever, depending on your preferences, and what section youre doing. you have a lot more flexibility with regards to scheduling.

Darn, and I've been doing my section hiking on the New England AT anytime from March to mid-December. In winter I climb the New England high peaks. Wait a minute, some of those winter hikes are on the AT as well. Huh.

Wow, you know me so well.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:29
"You seem to have a high opinion of your opinion."
doesnt everyone?

"There is a difference between indisputable facts and ones opinions."
thats not the issue. i just think that there needs to be a uniform meaning

"hiking more miles doesn't make your opinion necessarily better."
that is correct. but it gives me a broader basis for comparison. for that reason, i wont ever argue with reinhold messner about which is harder, k2 or everest, because i havent climbed either.

" There are many people who have hiked lots of years on the AT and I suspect they don't agree on everything either."
no, really, you think?

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:33
right, tramper, but by going in december, youre choosing the most difficult time. i just meant you could much more easily work it to have little to no bad weather by sectioning only in the best months, which would not be really possible on a thru-hike.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 15:37
i have to go, but before i do, what is your definition of section-hiking? that term is even slipperier than thru hiker. because this argument may be a prime example of two ppl have differing definitions of a term, thereby causing misunderstandings and missing the point, which is the main crux of the other argument im having with the fine gentlemen of this board.

SGT Rock
10-12-2004, 16:01
Well, think of it this way. I hit a section when work allows, bad weather or not.

Alligator
10-12-2004, 16:41
right, tramper, but by going in december, youre choosing the most difficult time. i just meant you could much more easily work it to have little to no bad weather by sectioning only in the best months, which would not be really possible on a thru-hike.
As opposed to what, like March-Sept, which is major thru-hiker season and the easiest months to hike?

I'll give you my section hiking plan. It was one 3 day weekend a month until I finish the AT. Since my son was born, that has been cut about in half to once every two months. Plus one long week which has been in fall and summer.

It takes lots of juggling to get the time to go hiking, and I refuse to miss a hike. Sectioners generally have limited time off. It's not five one month blocks. It's a weekend here, and a week maybe two at another time.

I will never cancel a section due to inclement weather. I got dropped off in a major snowstorm two winters ago, alone I might add. I have stepped out of the car into pouring down rainstorms. I have climbed tall mountains in a single bound...well this last one is facetious.

Yes, somebody could pick the easier months, but you make the assumption that we all do. Most section hikers are at least 3 season hikers, which is all the majority of thru-hikers are. I've read quite a few trail journals, and I know I have way more bad weather experience than many thrus and I'm not even finished with the AT yet. Do you think Mahoosuc Notch is tough? Try it in the winter. Seriously though, I don't recommend it.

Section hiker-a person attempting to complete the entire AT in pieces, with the attempt lasting longer than one year. The hiker has some goal to complete the trail.

A-Train
10-12-2004, 17:28
I've done a thru-hike and sectioned about 500 miles of the AT. Section hiking is harder. Got to start out fresh each time, out of shape. Added stress and driving to get to the trailhead and generally a late night gathering everything. You're more accepted as a thru-hiker. Things just start to flow. Its not easy to break into the "community" as easily if your not going all the way. When your destination is Bland Virginia or Manchester Vermont or wherever, its just not as strong as Katahdin is. I never wanted to give up on my thru-hike but I've gotten very frustrated on smaller hikes. I guess it depends how you look at it

Footslogger
10-12-2004, 17:52
Gotta agree with A-Train here. Did a thru last year and had already done all of GA and most of NC prior to that as a section hike. A thru-hike has it's challenges but my hat is off to those with the determination to go back time after time and knock it out in sections. I'm a pretty committed person, once I set my mind to something, but doing it all in one fell swoop was my preference in the end. Plus I was fortunate enough to have a partner who had already hiked the AT (2001) and was willing to support me while I stopped the world and got off for 6 months. Not everyone has that luxury.

It's true that there is often more immediate "acceptance" of thru-hikers on the AT than section hikers ...but hey, we're all out there together regardless of how many miles we end up covering.

Just my .02

'Slogger
AT 2003

Hammock Hanger
10-12-2004, 18:00
It had been my intent in 2001 to do a thru... didn't happen. I didn't find it physically challenging to return to the trail in 2002. Within days I felt I had my stride back. I didn't have any problem at all fitting in with the thrus. This summer, however, I was definately challenged physically. Maybe because of where I started, the Whites, none the less I was hurting and slow, very slow. Do to my slowness I could not maintain the miles of a thru thus not getting to know any of them long enough to get "adopted-in". Therefore I was hurting and lonely, not a good thing. I left the trail. Hooked up with a good friend from 2001 and did the north side of the Long Trail. Started to get back in shape. Got in touch with a few thru's I knew and went back to the AT to hook up with them. In shape and with a family I found the trail life I had missed. -- None of this really has to do with yellow blazing but who cares... Sue/HH

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 19:48
regarding the acceptance issue, i think its just a matter of the thrus just being much more familiar with each other due to having spent more miles together. sectioners often tended to do slightly less mileage, at least initially, so generally didnt fall into a groove with ppl. in my experience, for the most part, hikers just like to be with hikers.

Crash! Bang!
10-12-2004, 19:51
anyways, the topic was yellow-blazing. i thought getting off topic was verboten around here?

A-Train
10-12-2004, 21:14
anyways, the topic was yellow-blazing. i thought getting off topic was verboten around here?
Only when talking about politics :jump

zephyr1034
10-13-2004, 00:28
I read about this camping area on the Trail in Maryland. A side trail comes off the AT at point A, loops past campsites B, C and D, and rejoins the main trail at E. Some people camping at, say point C, would return down the side trail to A to get back on the AT, rather than go on to E via the side trail. That way, they didn't miss any of the official AT route.

Blue Jay
10-13-2004, 08:56
blue jay, the point is its really just about semantics. i dont want it to be a competition. i just think the terms we bandy about should have consistent meaning and not just mean whatever the user wants them to mean. i was an english major in college

Thank you for pointing that out. If I had known that in the beginning I would not have bothered responding in the first place.

The Old Fhart
10-13-2004, 09:17
Originally Posted by Crash! Bang!
i know im going to get accused of elitism here, but until youve actually done a thru-hike, you have no basis for comparison, unless youve done an exceptionally large section, for say, a month or more, doing 12-20 miles a day. do a thru-hike, or springer to damascus in 6 weeks, then we'll talk. you cant know what its like until youve done it.Well, seeing I’m one of the people who has section hiked the entire trail and then thru-hiked the entire trail, I’m may be qualified to talk. Here’s my take on your thru vs. section debate.

The hike that is by far the hardest is the one that you are actually doing, not the one you’re not doing, or someone else’s hike. Because you may feel that the way you hiked was harder than someone else’s, belittling their hike may help validate your hike but it isn’t right and this isn’t a competition. No more really has to be said but there are distinct differences between a section and a thru and since that seems to be what this discussion has drifted towards. Here is my take on it.

As a section hiker I took no days off and hiked every day I was out there. A day off from a thru isn’t that big a deal because it is easier to make up over the long haul. The cost of transportation for a section hike is far higher and a friend of mine who also sectioned logged over 10,000 miles of travel to complete the trail. Other posters have already commented on the “break-in” period when you start hiking. It takes up to 3 weeks for your body to adapt and to really get into a routine where hiking every day becomes second nature. Many section hikers don’t have longer than that amount of time per year to devote to a hike so they never get to that level where the hike becomes most enjoyable. Although it is a concern, I never had a big problem with fitting in with the thru community because one thing they respect is miles and I was doing high miles with a large pack. My miles per day were higher on my section hike than when I thru hiked. A really big problem with section hiking is you never know how family, job, health, etc, will change over the much longer time frame required to section hike the trail. I sure that a big reason that a lot of section hikers don’t finish is because of these unexpected logistical problems. Not that thru hikers don’t have some of these concerns as well but these concerns are multiplied for section hikers.

As a thru-hiker I could get into the groove where you are more relaxed and feel good enough so you’re appreciating the world around you more. I took more photos on my thru hike than when I sectioned. Partly because of the experiences on my previous hike, I talked to everyone on the trail whether they were thru, section, day hiker, or jogger; and because of that got to hear many interesting stories and meet people a lot of thru hikers would pass by. Talking to others was also an excuse to stop and slow the pace down. My goal as a thru hiker was to average not more than 15 miles per day on the trail and I actual did 14.6.

One of the big differences from a section hike that I noticed as a NOBO thru hiker was how psychologically drained you can get by the time you get to, say, NH. Some thru hikers I spent much time with and were doing great would just drop off the trail because they could not stand to be there another day. Even with the torn ligament in my foot that caused me pain since Waynesboro, VA, I never got to that point but there were days when I would be on a roller coaster thinking how great this was and 5 minutes later wondering if it were worth it. This feeling is something that, as a section hiker, I could never understand or even imagine.

Also the end of the hike isn’t quite so traumatic for a section hiker as for a thru but this is the piece of the hike that almost all hikers are ill-prepared for. I like to describe finishing on Katahdin (for NOBOs) as like a graduation where most of the class is missing. You remember all the people you have hiked with for months and you would love to share this moment with them, but they are not there. The feeling that lots of hikers get at the end of a hike is that of loss. One hiker I met on the summit was just standing there and I asked him what was wrong. He said: “What do I do now?” You have been dedicated to this intense activity with others who have become very close and all of a sudden, they are gone. What a lot of hikers feel is akin to the grieving process that follows a death of a loved one. I was lucky because I had hiked for 45 years, had sectioned hiked, and it didn’t strike me as hard as it does many hikers. I think this is probably the biggest problem with a thru hike and the least recognized or discussed.

Well, despite the length of this post, people who know me realize this was the Reader’s Digest version.

Youngblood
10-13-2004, 09:25
TOF,

That was a great post.

Youngblood

Blue Jay
10-13-2004, 09:37
Also the end of the hike isn’t quite so traumatic for a section hiker as for a thru but this is the piece of the hike that almost all hikers are ill-prepared for. I like to describe finishing on Katahdin (for NOBOs) as like a graduation where most of the class is missing. You remember all the people you have hiked with for months and you would love to share this moment with them, but they are not there. The feeling that lots of hikers get at the end of a hike is that of loss. One hiker I met on the summit was just standing there and I asked him what was wrong. He said: “What do I do now?” You have been dedicated to this intense activity with others who have become very close and all of a sudden, they are gone. What a lot of hikers feel is akin to the grieving process that follows a death of a loved one. I was lucky because I had hiked for 45 years, had sectioned hiked, and it didn’t strike me as hard as it does many hikers. I think this is probably the biggest problem with a thru hike and the least recognized or discussed.


Wow, Old Fhart, I'd been trying to put that in words for years and you just nailed it. That was even worth another semantics speech by C. Bang.

Crash! Bang!
10-13-2004, 09:56
yea, blue jay, i can respect old pharts post, it was well-thought out and articulate, as compared to the way you resorted to making personal potshots at me.

Blue Jay
10-13-2004, 10:02
Yes, I do hear the violins playing.

Crash! Bang!
10-13-2004, 10:03
maybe it would be more fair to say that, mentally, the thru is harder, but physically, the section is harder.

Crash! Bang!
10-13-2004, 10:04
oh, and now snideness. how very grown-up.

TankHiker
10-13-2004, 10:55
Last year I summitted Katahdin with a couple that was finishing their thru-hike. They had logged about 100 miles a year for 20 years. All the thru-hikers were amazed at their dedication, and they were impressed with our drive. There was a great mutual respect between us. And in that moment when we finished, when we took a group picture at the top, we were all the same.

These section hikers lived somewhere near the trail down south. They took their vacation time each year to hike. This, of course, included travel time to get to random towns like Monson or Glencliff, then figure out how to get home. They hiked sometimes in February snow, or sometimes in August heat, depending on their situation, and what section they needed to hit next. I couldn't imagine dedicating 20 years of all my vacation time to this.

I told them that it was relatively easy for me to take 6 months to hike, while they spent 20 years doing it. Conversely, they told me that hiking the entire trail at once was crazy. My point is that both have their challenges. Any person who hikes every mile of the AT has accomplished an amazing feat. And I think that is the only conclusion everyone can agree on.

Just my opinion. :D

-Tank

Crash! Bang!
10-13-2004, 11:02
group hug, everybody!:clap :sun :jump :banana :-? :D :welcome

Hammock Hanger
10-13-2004, 11:03
My point is that both have their challenges. Any person who hikes every mile of the AT has accomplished an amazing feat. And I think that is the only conclusion everyone can agree on.
-Tank



Well said. Sue/HH