To answer the Companion or Guide book question

[gravityman]

Sorry, got confused will all the posts in that thread...

We used the data book and the Handbook (that's the one by Wingfoot, right?) at the start. We later added the Companion. Our experience was the Handbook was good on trial and okay off trail. The companion had better town info, not great trail info. And sometimes one book would have a town map, and other times the other would. Sometimes you need both books just to find one place because they both had poor directions. Also some town services are listed in one book but not the other (we found that to be true about clinics).
We cut them up and bounced the left over book ahead to reduce weight. Plus it gaves us a lot to read on breaks. "How many different hamburger joints are there in the next town?" "How tall is the next mountain we have to go up"
We never used the maps. Too heavy and too expensive. I always regreted when I yogied a look at the profile that was coming up. It always either looked a lot worse than it was or was a lot worse than it looked :)

[Jack Tarlin]

Would very strongly disagree that the maps' weight and expense rendered them not worth the trouble. On the contrary, there are a lot of good reasons to carry them; this has been discussed extensively elsewhere on this site. It should also be noted that repeated "yogi-ing" or borrowing of stuff from other hikers, especially when one freely admits that they were too cheap to purchase these items themself---well, sorry, this is unacceptable. If you feel that something is useful or necessary to your trip, then obtain and carry your own. If you decide you don't need something, then make a conscious effort to do without it. But it's annoying to other hikers to constantly be borrowing or cadging stuff that they took the time, trouble, and expense to purchase and carry. In my opinion, nobody should venture into the backcountry for 6 hours, never mind 6 months, without current Trail maps and the ability to read them. To do otherwise is irresponsible; to make a practice of continually taking advantage of others by "yogi-ing" their stuff is merely lazy.

[SGT Rock]

JAck, how often, if ever, do you update your maps? Seems like for the most part you could use the same maps most every time.

[chomp]

Older maps, together with an updated data book, should work just fine. Before heading out in the morning, check the data book distance with the distance on the map profile and you should have your answer if there has been a major relo or not. If the distances are different, using the same method you should be able to, fairly quickly, determine what section has changed. While the maps won't match up for that section, you should still be ON the map since the AT corridor is fairly narrow in most locations. I used my 99 maps to hike a couple of weeks in Virginia with no problems at all and continue to use my VT, NH and Maine maps for hiking locally.

[Jack Tarlin]

Yes to what Chomp said. However, after a few years, especially if there's been some major re-location work in a particular section, it can't hurt to get new ones.

[gravityman]

I agree, yoging is annoying, especially in abunance, but I think that little treatise there was a bit over done... Asking someone to see their map while you are sitting around talking is different than relying on getting information from it. I do resent the implication of 'continually' yoging and being called 'lazy'. Those are some strong inferences from a relatively minor comment which was simply supplied to give my limited experience with the maps. Gesh...
Anyway, I stand by my opinion, but respect other peoples opinions. I didn't need the maps, and the occasional glimps that I got from friends (there, I didn't actually yogi! Bother!) did not add much for me. But I can see how some people really find them useful, especially if you have a propensity for losing the trail. I also think that it is far from 'irresponsible' to hike the AT without maps. A lot of people make the decision not to carry them. again, gesh...

Gravity Man

[The Weasel]

While having people mooch too much, especially food or lighting, is a pain in the ass, I actually found that having others ask if they could look at my maps (or having them sort of look across the table as if to say, "hey! can I look?") to be both flattering and a good way of making friends on the trail.

Sharing information, I think, is different, and everyone would have something useful; I had detailed small-scale topos with the full AT Guide pages. Others would have the ATC maps, and once in a while I'd enjoy looking at the elevation profile. Someone else would have a full Data Book, and I'd want to know something more than the page I had torn out to carry. No one minded, since it was a way of saying, I think, "We are all going to walk that stretch, so let's share what we know about it." That's different from some twit who says, "Wow, dude, I'm an ultralighter! Can I use your spoon?"

The Weasel

[Jack Tarlin]

Apologies to gravitman if I was a bit heavyhanded, but he did, in fact say "I always regretted when I yogied a look...." This seemed to imply that this was something he did quite frequently. And while Weasel's right about offering someone the occasional look at your guidebooks or maps being no big deal, which of course it itsn't, it's a fact that every year there are people who for one reason or another (trying to save weight, money, whatever) elect to do without certain items, but then, once they're out there, continually hit up other folks for their use or borrowing. And this is wrong. Once, twice, occasionally, fine. However, when you're asking people six times a day what time it is cuz you don't wanna carry a watch, or ask people every day or at every shelter to check out their maps or Handbook or whatever....well, this is to be avoided. This past year, there were LOTS of folks who did this on a near-daily basis---maps, squeeze butter, can openers, food spices, and worst of all, the battalion of cigarette moochers who were either too cheap, or more likely, operating under the delusion that they were "quitting" and it was therefore OK to bum ten a day from anyone they discovered who smoked. In that in New York, smokes were seven bucks the pack this got to be something of a pain in the ass. What is comes down to is this: Hikers need to be self-sufficient. The third time you find yourself asking to borrow or use the same item from another hiker should be a wake-up call: Either get yourself your OWN, or learn to do without.

But forget all of the this. The main reason to carry your own maps is very simple: You should carry them at all times cuz it's the smart thing to do in the backcountry.

[SGT Rock]

For goodness sake, go get some maps.

[EarlyRiser]

Knowledge is free, wisdom you have to discover for yourself.

i dont see anything wrong with sharing a map with others to check out upcoming trail conditions, but ya if you elect not to carry it yourself and are rellying on others to have brought their own then thats not fair to them, or to you. if its your hike then why must you relly on somone else? maps are a lot of fun, just the other day i got one of my old maps out and was looking over it just looking, spent over an hour and it was fun. im not sayin everyone will be as enthraled with topography as me, but its still interesting to think about what it was like when the first people came into these areas without maps or anything like that totaly unsure of what was ahead of them. but thats just my way of thinking of things. maps can be very useful in a pinch, so long as you know the proper way of using them. ya cant just put a compas ontop of a map and say ok that says north and the map says i go east so ill walk east. proper training in back country skills can save your life, and the lives of others. i know several people on this forum have stories of lost hikers theyve encountered and set straight by use of a good map. that, i think, is testament enough to the usefulness. but hey hike your own hike, if your good without one then thats great.

[chris]

I think I'm going to take a bit of heat for this, but I do not think that maps are absolutely required on the AT, at least outside of northern New England. Here is what I, personally, mean by the term "absolutely", at least in this context. A moderately experienced, properly equipped, and mentally prepared hiker does not need the maps to navigate on the AT, to recover from being lost, or to get to a road quickly. As is well know, the AT is exceptionally well marked. It is hard to get lost. I did occasionally go 100 yards down a wrong trail during my May walk, but after seeing no blazes, I turned around and found the right trail. Maps might facilitate finding exactly the right trail to take to a road or a campsite, but, to be honest, most trails that linked with the AT in the south (some exceptions, of course), led to campgrounds or roads anyways. Besides, there are enough people on the AT that help is never very far away. In the end, I think being able to fall back on experience and keeping a steady head is more important than carrying maps. Note what this means: If you don't have much experience other other than day hiking or car camping, I'd carry maps if I were you. If you are not prepared to spend a night cold, hungry, and alone in the woods, I'd carry maps with you.

This being said, I have to say that I carry maps and think they are a good thing. At the very least, with the AT maps you get a reasonably accurate trail profile and, even where it isn't accurate, can read off the topo. The maps show some water sources, locations of towns, and help in identifying upcoming (and past) landmarks and other natural phenomena. The maps help with spotting potential lunch sites where you might have a particularly good view or a pleasant rest.
In short, I do not think that the maps are necessary, but are a nice thing to have and something worth carrying.

[Jack Tarlin]

I really don't wanna get in another pissing contest with Chris over this point; the matter of maps has been extensively discussed elsewhere on this site, and in another post, I provided about 10 good reasons why everyone should carry trail maps and know how to use them.

I must, however, take issue with his comment that "the moderately experienced, properly equipped, and mentally prepared hiker does not need the maps."

From having been involved with more searches and rescues than I can remember; from having to use the maps on all seven of my A.T. hikes in order to find water; to blue-blaze around washed-out or impasable Trail; to aid in finding lost hikers; to help pinpoint the exact location of injured hikers for an incoming rescue party; to get to a road in a hurry; to transport injured or sick hikers, and so on---I can safely and confidently say this: Regardless of your backwoods experience, and regardless of your mental prpeparation, you should bring maps with you whenever you venture into the backcountry, and to say that the "properly equipped" hiker doesn't need them is simply wrong, and misses the entire point----if you don't carry them, then you simply aren't properly equipped.

[chris]

I second what Jack said in the first half of his first sentence.

[The Weasel]

One interesting aspect of "the great map debate" is that a "map" is not necessarily the "lines on a sheet of paper" that we often think it is. The dictionary definition (#1) is "A representation, usually on a plane surface, of a region of the earth or heavens". But there is nothing in that definition that mandates lines representing roads, or dashes for trails, or little black dots for buildings.

The ancient Polynesians, as they sailed the Pacific, had "maps" that were, in essence, knotted strings that were really more a set of directions to a location or descriptions of what they would find. In the Western World, "maps" as we know them are a relatively recent phenomenon, and were derived from pictures of places rather than as a navigational tool.

My point in this is that it is entirely appropriate to consider such things as the Data Book and the Companion/Guide (or, for that matter, someone else's trail journal; some scientific opinion considers the Norse Sagas to be as much a "travel guidebook" about how to get to places and what you'll find there as they are stories/songs) to be "maps", since they serve much the same purpose. I realize they are difficult to "orient" to a direction, but they tell one how to get from point A to point B, what is in between, and what one can expect along the way. The Data Book even gives you a pretty good idea of elevation changes, when it indicates gaps at one height and, a few miles later, a summit that is far higher.

Viewed this way, I'm not sure that there is a lot of difference between people on this topic; should one go off on the trail with nothing? Clearly not, and I'm with Jack on this. Is a AAA road map adequate? Well, maybe not, but highway maps worked for Earl Shaffer. Can you "navigate" the trail with a Data Book and the Guidebook? In many ways, yes. Chacun a son gout, n'est pas?

The Weasel

[gravityman]

I like what The Weasel said! It's all a matter of degree. For some people the data book is enough to get from GA>ME, for others they need the maps. You will definitely use what you have, and maybe learn that you need more (If you have the data book you might find yourself saying 'should have brought the maps.' if you have the maps, you might find yourself saying 'should have brought a GPS.' If you have a GPS you might find yourseld saying 'should have brought a cell phone.') You have to find what works for you, but they are all maps to one degree or another.
I'd use the 'hike your own hike' phrase, but I have found it is just a euphemism for f-off.
I did find the whole 'yoging' thread interesting. It seems that in the online world it has a very negative connotation. On trail it didn't seem to carry that for us. We used it to mean just about anything that you get when you ask for it, like 'yoging a ride into town' or 'yogied someone into getting me water.'

Gravity man

[chris]

Well, I've usually taken yogiing to mean trying to get something from a dayhiker/weekender/tourist by pleading destitution and thereby depriving them of something. Yogiing can also be practiced on other thruhikers or long section hikers. It usually works by making the person with the items feel sorry for you, the person without, and hence they turn over something. This is wrong.

Incidently, the most yogied thing appears to be tobacco. At the victims of the yogi seem to be predominantly thru hikers or long distance hikers. The number of people who try to use the AT to quit seems to be enormous. Tobacco can get expensive, as Jack pointed out in another post and the last thing a smoker wants to happen is to see his cache abruptly empty. Particulary if he is feeding the habit of people who claim not to smoke.

[gravityman]

As an ex-smoker, I've been on both sides of the fence. Finally kicked it though, long before I hiked. I totally understand that. It's tough to say no, but, hey, out in the woods its like trying to bum fuel. I would never do it no matter how low I got, and I would never give any up unless it was a friend...

Gravity man

[SGT Rock]

I've been around a lot of smokers that have quit. Usually when a smoker says he has quit, he usually means he has quit buying cigaretts, not quit smoking.

[chris]

As a current and ex-smoker, I would say that Sgt. Rock sums up my position almost completely. And, when I do have tobacco and see someone really jonesing, I'll usually offer some if they want it. I've been in their position too many times not to feel for them. However, that is usually it, unless they are a friend.