What qualifies as a thru-hike? [Archive]

topshelf

01-10-2011, 18:11

I know the AT, PCT, CDT qualify as through hikes, as well as many others. But I was planning my hikes this summer and I am planning on completing a couple of longer trails here in the area and I was wondering if they would qualify as "thru-hikes". I am planning on doing the Iron Mountain Trail (about 47 miles) and the Pine Mountain Trail (around 82 miles, link:http://www.pinemountaintrail.com/index.html). I don't think they would qualify as thru-hike trails.

So what exactly would it take to qualify a trail as a trail you'd have to "thru-hike" if you hiked it from end to end? Does it need to take a certain number of days to be considered a thru? Does the trail need to be a certain length? Must you resupply yourself?

What do you think it takes to qualify a trail as one you have to thru-hike it to go from end to end?

*Sorry if this stated somewhere else, but I couldn't find it*

The Snowman

01-10-2011, 18:31

I always feel a thru hike is any trail that you don't hike as an out and back hike. that is one you hike trail head to trail head.

Pedaling Fool

01-10-2011, 18:35

Depends on who you ask -- it's as simple as that.

Cookerhiker

01-10-2011, 18:38

I don't think there's a universal answer or commonly-acepted criteria for this. FWIW, if you look at the ALDHA directory you'll see for each member a list of the trails they've hiked. There's a key in the inside cover. Many of trails listed aren't very long - less than 100 miles, some less than 50 miles.

Just 2 days ago I received in the mail my formal acknowledgement that I've hiked the entire Susquehannock Trail (85 miles)for which I now qualify for a patch; they didn't use the term "thruhike." Re. the Long Trail in VT, I've never seen the Green Mountain Club use the term "thruhike" but end-to-end, a term meaning you've hiked the entire LT regardless of whether it was one continuous hike or many section hikes over years.

Thinking about it, I've hiked in one hike (each) the entire Laurel Highlands Trail, Susquehannock Trail, and Black Forest Trail (70, 85, 42 miles) but I don't refer to these hikes as "thruhikes" - I guess my own personal criteria is something longer. I did refer to planned-but-uncompleted hikes of the Allegheny Trail and John Muir Trail as "thruhike" attempts.

topshelf

01-10-2011, 18:41

I knew this was more of an opinion than stated definition. Is there really no consensus at all?

Phreak

01-10-2011, 18:51

Hike from one terminus to the other and its a thru hike... regardless of the length of the trail.

Sly

01-10-2011, 19:22

A long distance hike is generally defined as one with one with one or more normal resupplies (usually 50 miles or more) IMO, a "thru-hike" would have to be at least that long. For instance, if you take the Kimsey Creek Trail cut-off in it's entirety from Deep Gap to Standing Indian, it's not a "thru-hike".

Of course, you could also hike the Foothills Trail without resupply but it's distance would allow for one.

kayak karl

01-10-2011, 19:28

10-K

01-10-2011, 19:28

This works fine for me... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thru-hike

Lone Wolf

01-10-2011, 19:33

end to end. no days off

Sly

01-10-2011, 19:50

where did you get the 50 mile thing????? if it is fact i thru-hiked the Batona Trail.:)

LOL.. sorry, only 49.5 miles. Maybe you can yo-yo it. :D

Sly

01-10-2011, 19:53

This works fine for me... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thru-hike

Yeah, pretty much what I said. ;)

max patch

01-10-2011, 20:00

..........
Hike from one terminus to the other and its a thru hike... regardless of the length of the trail.

yep

earlyriser26

01-10-2011, 20:01

end to end. no days off

So 2 nights in town and it isn't a thru? :eek: Since I am a section hiker I will leave it up to the "higher powers" to decide. ATC, views all 2,000 milers the same.

Luddite

01-10-2011, 20:02

end to end. no days off

Are you just kidding?

Sly

01-10-2011, 20:04

Hike from one terminus to the other and its a thru hike... regardless of the length of the trail.

..........

yep

IMO, that's about as dumb as one can get. Many trails are simply day hikes and hiking them shouldn't be classified as thru-hikes.

Not that Wiki is the definitive source but here's what they have for long distance trails in the US...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-distance_trails_in_the_United_States

The shortest one I see is 41 miles..

kayak karl

01-10-2011, 20:07

LOL.. sorry, only 49.5 miles. Maybe you can yo-yo it. :D
DAMN!!!!:mad:

max patch

01-10-2011, 20:19

IMO, that's about as dumb as one can get. Many trails are simply day hikes and hiking them shouldn't be classified as thru-hikes.

So I guess you disregard the 100 meter dash at the Olympics as unworthy as its "too short" a race...

kayak karl

01-10-2011, 20:22

So I guess you disregard the 100 meter dash at the Olympics as unworthy as its "too short" a race...
the olympics has thru-hikes, too cool:banana

Lone Wolf

01-10-2011, 20:32

Are you just kidding?

no. not at all

Sly

01-10-2011, 21:09

So I guess you disregard the 100 meter dash at the Olympics as unworthy as its "too short" a race...

You're almost correct. It's a sprint, compared to a distance race.

jersey joe

01-10-2011, 21:25

Hike from one terminus to the other and its a thru hike... regardless of the length of the trail.
Agree, but there should be a reasonable time frame...

end to end. no days off
No days off isn't quite reasonable, but there must be a timeframe, depending on the trail. It should be a continuous journey.

Phreak

01-10-2011, 21:50

IMO, that's about as dumb as one can get. Many trails are simply day hikes and hiking them shouldn't be classified as thru-hikes.

Not that Wiki is the definitive source but here's what they have for long distance trails in the US...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-distance_trails_in_the_United_States

The shortest one I see is 41 miles..
41 miles is a day hike for me. So I guess that trail is out for me to thru hike. :rolleyes:

topshelf

01-10-2011, 21:58

end to end. no days off

So Lone Wolf you'd be OK if someone said I thru-hiked the IMT?

I hope this thread isn't getting anyone hot under the collar. I was just wondering if there were any qualifications. Should there be a set qualification so no one says I through hiked Horne Knob trail(.5 miles)? Does it really matter to you if they say they are a thru-hiker and they've never really hiked anything over 50 miles or never spent days up days in the woods?

kayak karl

01-10-2011, 22:17

Thank God this topic came up. i've been waiting for this for years.:)

P.S. how much does a thru-hike cost?

Lone Wolf

01-10-2011, 22:21

So Lone Wolf you'd be OK if someone said I thru-hiked the IMT?

I hope this thread isn't getting anyone hot under the collar. I was just wondering if there were any qualifications. Should there be a set qualification so no one says I through hiked Horne Knob trail(.5 miles)? Does it really matter to you if they say they are a thru-hiker and they've never really hiked anything over 50 miles or never spent days up days in the woods?
yup. no days off

4shot

01-10-2011, 23:25

it's up to you to decide what a thru hike is. If you go and truly do the miles until you are satisfied (and are completely honest with yourself) then you are a thru hiker. Don't let others define it or you.

Roland

01-11-2011, 05:10

end to end. no days off

If, by your definition, a hiker is disqualified by a zero-day, I'm guessing you can count all the living thru-hikers on your hands. Maybe on one hand.

Who makes the list?
Jen Pharr
David Horton

What about?
Warren Doyle
Ward Leonard
Mat Hazley

Unless I am misunderstanding you, that definition seems a bit extreme, LW.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 08:32

If, by your definition, a hiker is disqualified by a zero-day, I'm guessing you can count all the living thru-hikers on your hands. Maybe on one hand.

Who makes the list?
Jen Pharr
David Horton

What about?
Warren Doyle
Ward Leonard
Mat Hazley

Unless I am misunderstanding you, that definition seems a bit extreme, LW.

redeye asked, i answered.

ARambler

01-11-2011, 11:48

The official definition of a Thru Hike is "An unimaginative itinerary by someone without a real life." The term is meant to elicit condenscending approval from someone who really thinks, "didn't they invent the iron horse for that sort of thing?"

The minimum distance depends on the gullibility of the listener.

Rambler

jersey joe

01-11-2011, 11:58

max patch

01-11-2011, 11:58

[/INDENT]Unless I am misunderstanding you, that definition seems a bit extreme, LW.

Roland, you can't believe anything LW posts. His answers are solely based on pot stirring.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 12:00

Roland, you can't believe anything LW posts. His answers are solely based on pot stirring.

i've always said a thru-hike is end to end, no days off. i take offense to you accusing me of pot stirring

v5planet

01-11-2011, 12:07

4shot

01-11-2011, 12:15

[/INDENT]Actually I make this list.

I have now adjusted my records accordingly and offer my apologies for this egregious oversight.;)

topshelf

01-11-2011, 12:15

I guess after all of this I'm going to give thru-hiking my own self-defined definition.

Thru-hike criteria:
1. you must hike from terminus to terminus
2. must require multiple nights in the woods
3. must require the use of a full pack of food
4. once you are finished people must be able to tell you've been hiking by your disheveled appearance

I guess this is one of those things that cannot be truly defined except by one's self. There are no right or wrong definitions. Whether you choose to accept someone else's definition is purly up to you. You will just have to agree to disgree.

This is what it is and will be to me.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 12:17

i've always said a thru-hike is end to end, no days off.

and you carry all your stuff. no slackpacking

Cookerhiker

01-11-2011, 12:25

Earl Shaffer didn't take any zero days. Even when his family met him in southern PA, he hiked some the day they picked him up, he spent one night at home, and was back on the Trail the next day.

Now did he cover every white blaze? As I said on another recent thread, he did all he could considering in some stretches, the trail was obliterated with no white blazes.

Cookerhiker

01-11-2011, 12:29

and you carry all your stuff. no slackpacking

And Earl addressed this subject also:

"Someone suggested the pack could be left behind but my answer to that was emphatic. The faithful old framepack had come all the way with me from Georgia and it wouldn't be left behind on the last five miles"

So he carried his pack up Katahdin

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 12:42

[/INDENT]
So he carried his pack up Katahdin

and i have too. many times

jersey joe

01-11-2011, 14:56

I have now adjusted my records accordingly and offer my apologies for this egregious oversight.;)
Thanks! I guess my point was that if I did it, surely there must be many more?!? Now I am wondering....how many people actually take zero zero days?

Roland

01-11-2011, 17:16

Two pages and no one has yet evoked the sacred mantra of "hike your own hike"?

Lone Wolf's definition is stringent, but he's not imposing it on you; nor is he going to be there auditing your thru-hike attempt one step at a time, so let it go. So decide for yourself what you think a 'thru-hike' is, and then more importantly, decide how much you care about the definition in the first place -- get out there and hike!

Right on. Well said.

The reason for my question to LW was for clarification. His definition of a thru-hike differs significantly from mainstream, so I wanted to be sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

He's entitled to his opinion, because it's......we'll, his.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 17:18

Right on. Well said.

The reason for my question to LW was for clarification. His definition of a thru-hike differs significantly from mainstream, so I wanted to be sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

He's entitled to his opinion, because it's......we'll, his.

if you take days off then it's just a bunch of section hikes. just how i see it

Roland

01-11-2011, 17:18

Thanks! I guess my point was that if I did it, surely there must be many more?!? Now I am wondering....how many people actually take zero zero days?

To be honest, Joe, I'm surprised that a "regular" hiker completed the trail w/o a zero day. I didn't expect anyone to raise their hand. Good for you!

Sly

01-11-2011, 17:40

if you take days off then it's just a bunch of section hikes. just how i see it

Well, then you need to brush up on what a section hike is. IMO, a section hike falls short of a thru-hike because your intention was never to hike the entire trail, but a section of it.

There's valid reasons to take a day of, such as resupply, chores, gear changes, and rest, but none of them need your blessing.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 17:43

Well, then you need to brush up on what a section hike is. IMO, a section hike falls short of a thru-hike because your intention was never to hike the entire trail, but a section of it.

There's valid reasons to take a day of, such as resupply, chores, gear changes, and rest, but none of them need your blessing.

not caring what your take on it is. just answering the thread starter. please quit stirring things up

Sly

01-11-2011, 17:44

Two pages and no one has yet evoked the sacred mantra of "hike your own hike"?

Lone Wolf's definition is stringent, but he's not imposing it on you; nor is he going to be there auditing your thru-hike attempt one step at a time, so let it go. So decide for yourself what you think a 'thru-hike' is, and then more importantly, decide how much you care about the definition in the first place -- get out there and hike!

I don't think the OP was looking for a "stringent" definition of thru-hike but a generally accepted one. If you ask 100 other hikers, I doubt one would say you can't take a day off.

Sly

01-11-2011, 17:46

please quit stirring things up

LOL... that's your job.

Pedaling Fool

01-11-2011, 17:50

I don't think the OP was looking for a "stringent" definition of thru-hike but a generally accepted one. If you ask 100 other hikers, I doubt one would say you can't take a day off.
That's how I like my definitions, soft and malleable.

Roland

01-11-2011, 17:54

I don't think the OP was looking for a "stringent" definition of thru-hike but a generally accepted one.

The OP has acknowledged and accepted that there are varying definitions of a thru-hike. See below.

I guess this is one of those things that cannot be truly defined except by one's self. There are no right or wrong definitions. Whether you choose to accept someone else's definition is purly up to you. You will just have to agree to disgree.

Sly

01-11-2011, 17:58

That's nice but I'm not willing to agree you can't take any days off to be considered a thru-hike, or that days off turn a thru-hike into a section hike.

max patch

01-11-2011, 17:58

not caring what your take on it is. just answering the thread starter. please quit stirring things up

A quick search shows that you have defined a thru hike as 1. no days off, 2. not more than 1 day off in town, 3. no definition, can't be defined or some such nonsense.

Roland

01-11-2011, 18:03

That's nice but I'm not willing to agree you can't take any days off to be considered a thru-hike, or that days off turn a thru-hike into a section hike.

You don't have to agree with LW, Sly.

That's the nice thing about opinions; we can each have our own. And they don't have to coincide. You're not going to change LW's mind. He's not going to change yours. Let it go, before the Mods come after you. ;)

Cookerhiker

01-11-2011, 18:09

A quick search shows that you have defined a thru hike as 1. no days off, 2. not more than 1 day off in town, 3. no definition, can't be defined or some such nonsense.

And he's also on record as saying the Trail should be paved.

Speakeasy TN

01-11-2011, 18:39

And he's also on record as saying the Trail should be paved.

Please oh please tell me you're kidding!:eek:

russb

01-11-2011, 19:38

Question for LW.

In your definition does "no zero days" mean off trail, on trail or both? Also is that a 24hr period day, or something else? Just curious.

topshelf

01-11-2011, 20:39

Can't we all accept there are different opinions about the definition of a thru-hike?

I was just looking for some opinions or a general consensus. There's no right or wrong answer. No one has to be right, no one is wrong. Jeez.

Cookerhiker

01-11-2011, 20:43

Please oh please tell me you're kidding!:eek:

Check out post # 27 of this thread (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47972&highlight=pave&page=2). Now perhaps he has moderated his position somewhat. Wolf is a very flexible, thoughtful, open-minded, and reasonable person.

Sly

01-11-2011, 20:46

Wolf is a very flexible, thoughtful, open-minded, and reasonable person.

LOL... how much did he pay you to say that?

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 20:53

Check out post # 27 of this thread (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47972&highlight=pave&page=2). Now perhaps he has moderated his position somewhat. Wolf is a very flexible, thoughtful, open-minded, and reasonable person.
thank you sir

Bearpaw

01-11-2011, 21:01

Wolf, don't you ever get tired of messing with those who just don't get it?

Wait, never mind...

kayak karl

01-11-2011, 21:02

can't we all accept there are different opinions about the definition of a thru-hike?
no!!.............

Rocket Jones

01-11-2011, 21:03

People don't know how to deal with someone who speaks straight and plain. LW will never work for the State Department. That's a good thing, IMO.

pistol p

01-11-2011, 21:09

P.S. how much does a thru-hike cost?

I haven't been able to find ANY post on this. Thanks for asking :cool:

kayak karl

01-11-2011, 21:21

lets go back to no zero's. get up at 7 hit town at 9 am. stay 32 hours and leave at 5pm and camp at 7 pm. no zero. 2-3 miles each day. it's doable.

Sly

01-11-2011, 21:27

Can't we all accept there are different opinions about the definition of a thru-hike?
.

Within reason. Telling someone they don't think they're a thru-hiker because they took a few days off, isn't reasonable.

Lone Wolf

01-11-2011, 21:32

Within reason. Telling someone they don't think they're a thru-hiker because they took a few days off, isn't reasonable.

taking a few days off breaks the continuity of a "through hike" hence becoming a section hike. very simple to understand

kayak karl

01-11-2011, 21:45

i haven't thru hiked, but when i do, it will be my decision, not somebody on WB.
just go hike, worry about this later. kind of a mute point if you haven't done the trail yet.:-?

Mags

01-11-2011, 21:47

This thread may help...
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37459&highlight=high+holy+council+hiking

THere is a High Holy Council of Hiking afterall...

Sly

01-11-2011, 22:02

taking a few days off breaks the continuity of a "through hike" hence becoming a section hike. very simple to understand

Oh, a day off breaks up the "continuity" of the through hike! Like far out, groovy baby. I can dig it! :rolleyes:

pistol p

01-11-2011, 22:12

taking a few days off breaks the continuity of a "through hike" hence becoming a section hike. very simple to understand

And NO rides into or around town. By getting in an automobile, or on a bike, you are breaking the continuity of a "literal" hike.

Oops. Sorry. Just had to ;)
--
One more opinion, so here is mine...

I figure, as long as you complete the hike in one attempt.
You don't pack your gear up and go home for a spell (as you would in a section hike). I do believe in white blazing the trail. Slacking...whatever. As long as you're hiking all of the miles.

Taking a few days off is an extension of your hiking vacation.

Awol1970

01-11-2011, 22:13

I am raising my glass RIGHT NOW to Lone Wolf and the rest of the pot stirrers of the internet world who make forums like these a pleasure to read.

If I were to walk from GA to ME and decided to call it a thru hike then if I am a man with any spine at all I truly wouldn't give a s*%t what anyone else thought, now would I?

If I were to walk from GA to ME and decided to call it a long pleasurable stroll that involved some weather and some interesting people, then that would be cool too.

It's obviously very self-defining unless you have woefully low self-esteem.

pistol p

01-11-2011, 22:17

...unless you have woefully low self-esteem.

I do...thanks :datz

;)

kayak karl

01-11-2011, 22:50

this thread may help...
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37459&highlight=high+holy+council+hiking

there is a high holy council of hiking afterall...
your thread, your hype, you suc.............

Mags

01-11-2011, 23:38

your thread, your hype, you suc.............

But I do it with such panache....

topshelf

01-12-2011, 00:12

I kind of like Lone Wolf's idea of no zeros. Laying around town or a shelter all day is boring.

As kayak girl said you can still do a short distance and still be hiking. I shoot for 5-7 miles on a resupply/town day.

I hope that is OK by your standards LW...

Sly

01-12-2011, 00:22

Hikers have to make up some of the thickest skulls. How's this, if you thru-hike, you'll know it? Since LW hasn't he doesn't know.

Bearpaw

01-12-2011, 00:28

Hikers have to make up some of the thickest skulls. How's this, if you thru-hike, you'll know it? Since LW hasn't he doesn't know.

Sly, you know Wolf well enough to know he doesn't give a rat's hind quarters about how someone else hikes. He's spent this thread giving an arbitrary answer to show how pointless defining a "thru-hike" is, as if there were a real answer.

The best answer is start walking and figure out semantics for yourself.