PDA

View Full Version : Which maps are you packing?



melaniebk
10-26-2012, 22:28
There are AT maps by the ATC, National Geographic, Google...And some of the gear lists don't even mention packing a map at all. Are any of these maps better than the others for thru hikers? :confused:Keeping in mind that I don't have any portable technology for that purpose.

Hikes in Rain
10-27-2012, 09:49
I generally use the ATC maps, more than adequate for hiking. I like how they give a birds eye view of the area surrounding the trail where I'm hiking. They also have side trails on them, should I need them. Through the Smokies, I used the National Geographics map, since it came in the NC/TN package. It was great, as well, and I use it when we go up there for family reunions. I use Google maps for planning and daydreaming.

You're right, a lot of folks do just fine without maps. However, I just can't see going without them. If you have an emergency, for example, as I did when my brother fell and managed to break his arm, my map allowed me to identify side trails that took off eight or nine miles back to one of the cars.

Starchild
10-27-2012, 18:02
I plan to use the TOPO USA, Google maps and AT Trail apps in the iphone as my maps, AT companion as my text source.

ChinMusic
10-27-2012, 18:09
AWOL's guide book pages

ATTrails and Topo Maps in the iPhone. Guidebook data also on iPhone in PDF form

10-K
10-27-2012, 18:43
I like the AT maps... They're fun to pore over during lunch or at night in the tent planning the next day. Also like the elevation profiles on the maps.

Astro
10-27-2012, 19:04
While I enjoy having the AT maps to look at during breaks also, if you have AWOL's guide I believe you will be fine. At least in Southern part that I have done so far, may need to get advice from others if the Northern part of the AT is different. Compared to other trails it is amazingly well marked.

yellowsirocco
10-27-2012, 20:04
Postholer is selling maps that look pretty good. Never used them on the trail, but they look good from my easy chair.

People will say that you don't need maps and they are right, but maps are great to have when you get hurt. They are also pretty nice to look at when you stop for lunch and what not.

Don H
10-27-2012, 21:21
I never carry maps but it might be worth carrying a map of the Whites. I just carry the AT Guide.

Whack-a-mole
10-27-2012, 21:29
I have always carried a map and not really needed it. This week I decided not to bother with a map. I ended up having to cut my trip in half, and had to bail up near Spence Field shelter in the GSM. I could have actually USED a map for the first time and didn't have one. I will never go without a map again.

rusty bumper
10-28-2012, 09:35
On my end-to-end hike the only time I wished I'd had maps with me was in Maine. I was there in 2011 during and after hurricane Irene, and some of the rivers were impossible to ford due to high water levels. I managed to get some walk-around information from some folks in Cartunk and also from some people I met at a road crossing, but I sure wish I'd had a map of the AT in Maine with me.

Kerosene
10-28-2012, 13:27
Posts #9 & #10 are good examples of the value of having a map. 95% of the time you really don't need a map to hike the AT, but there are a surprising number of situations where they can come in handy, along with a small compass that you know how to use to orient yourself.

RETCW4
10-28-2012, 17:18
I bought the ATC bundle of maps for a thru hike this year. I didn't go due to family emergency. I am planning a March 2013 start. The maps are a combination of state, National geographic, ATC, Keystone Trail Club and Maine ATC maps. I did buy four maps that needed to be updated through the respective clubs. I like maps and use them if I need to get off the trail early.


Tumbleweed

melaniebk
10-28-2012, 18:25
I bought the ATC bundle of maps for a thru hike this year. I didn't go due to family emergency. I am planning a March 2013 start. The maps are a combination of state, National geographic, ATC, Keystone Trail Club and Maine ATC maps. I did buy four maps that needed to be updated through the respective clubs. I like maps and use them if I need to get off the trail early.


TumbleweedHi Tumbleweed, How do the Nat'l Geo. maps compare to the ATC maps? I'm going to have to get a set of maps, but I haven't been able to get a look at more than the cover of an ATC map. I generally like the N.G. maps well enough, and they're cheaper than the ATC ones.

moldy
10-29-2012, 08:08
The available maps sold by the ATC and the trail clubs are quite a mess. They are best suited for section hikers. For thru hikers the only decent way to keep up with them is with mail drops. They lack any kind of consistancy from map to map, different colors, scales, features, etc. One map will cover 200 miles the next one will cover 17. Some will be so out dated that they are worthless. Most thru-hikers in retrospect view the 200 plus dollar map set as a waste of money. I notice that you posted this in the "General" section of WB. The thru-hiker section may be better. You need the opinion of thru-hikers. Section hikers get a different prospective because it's easy to keep up with one or two at a time. Most past thru- hikers will say "forget the maps" just go with one of the books. I like maps, I keep one in my right front pocket at all times. I refer to it frequently and I show it to any thru-hikers who want to see it.

melaniebk
10-29-2012, 08:46
The lack of consistency from map to map would bother me. In that case, the maps postholer is offering appear to be more suitable. I'll have to give them another look and check their return policy. Regarding the fact that I posted this in the general forum, I actually posted it in the geography forum and asked the administrator to move it. I didn't really think about the thru hikers and section hikers having different perspectives, altho' it seems obvious now. I wonder if he wants to move it again? :-?

RETCW4
10-29-2012, 17:45
IMO the NatGeo maps are more of a detailed topo map. As moldy said the ATC maps vary from map to map as far as distances covered, colrs, etc. Again I only carry one in case I need to bail in an emegency. I rely alot on AWOL's AT Guide.

Tumbleweed

Mike2012
10-29-2012, 18:44
I'm working towards 1600 milez this year and like the atc maps the best although the Delorme maps came in mighty handy in Maine when I needed to make a quick exit on an old jeep trail in August. Wish atc sold the maps separate from the guidebook. Tried it with just the AWOL book but now a much bigger fan of maps.

fcoulter
10-31-2012, 09:06
Garmin sells the entire AT on a chip for use in their GPSs. How does this compare to the other maps?

peakbagger
10-31-2012, 11:52
Maps may be optional in some areas but in the whites they can be real handy as the AT is not signed the "AT" in all spots, instead the AT is on locally named trails. Once you get north of the whites, the maps are essential if you need to get off the trail or run into high water. Unlike the rest of the AT, following the nearest road may be a long hike in Me and Northern NH. As an example, if you need to get to civilization in the Mahoosucs, if you go north on a side trail you end up on a 25 mile long logging road, if you go south you end up on town road with lots of houses. Many other of the gaps in the ridge in ME are similar.

melaniebk
11-09-2012, 09:43
Maps may be optional in some areas but in the whites they can be real handy as the AT is not signed the "AT" in all spots, instead the AT is on locally named trails. Once you get north of the whites, the maps are essential if you need to get off the trail or run into high water. Unlike the rest of the AT, following the nearest road may be a long hike in Me and Northern NH. As an example, if you need to get to civilization in the Mahoosucs, if you go north on a side trail you end up on a 25 mile long logging road, if you go south you end up on town road with lots of houses. Many other of the gaps in the ridge in ME are similar.

In the Whites, are the trails not blazed with both the local trail name and the white blaze for the AT?

FarmerChef
11-09-2012, 10:50
The available maps sold by the ATC and the trail clubs are quite a mess. They are best suited for section hikers. For thru hikers the only decent way to keep up with them is with mail drops. They lack any kind of consistancy from map to map, different colors, scales, features, etc. One map will cover 200 miles the next one will cover 17. Some will be so out dated that they are worthless. Most thru-hikers in retrospect view the 200 plus dollar map set as a waste of money. I notice that you posted this in the "General" section of WB. The thru-hiker section may be better. You need the opinion of thru-hikers. Section hikers get a different prospective because it's easy to keep up with one or two at a time. Most past thru- hikers will say "forget the maps" just go with one of the books. I like maps, I keep one in my right front pocket at all times. I refer to it frequently and I show it to any thru-hikers who want to see it.

Hey I resemble that remark! :p

Ok, seriously, as a section hiker I have done with and without the maps. Having covered a significant portion of the trail, I'll echo Moldy's comments about the ATC maps. The formats do change, some are one sided (why, oh why?), some are double sided, some cover large areas others cover so little that if you are lost it's almost impossible to orient yourself with a compass and the topo. Also, once you hit your stride and start pulling down larger miles you'll find yourself using a map for two or three days, then having to reach for another, then another and so on. Perhaps the most frustrating part, though, is that the elevation profile and map data can and (in my experience) have been very out of date rendering any planning for the day moot as the distance between shelters was longer/shorter/harder/easier. Trust the Companion or Guide for mileage distances and elevations, not the maps!

I always recommend having a map for safety but if you have the Companion or Guide you may find the maps more trouble than their worth. On my last big section (175 miles) I forgot the maps but had the Guide and Companion and didn't miss the maps. The elevation profile in the Guide is quite handy. That said, if, like others, you wind up in an emergency and need to get off trail, you'll be hard pressed without GPS or maps on a phone to find the shortest way to safety or help.

wornoutboots
11-09-2012, 11:18
I don't take any maps OK go ahead & roast me :). I only carry a map if I'm in the Smokies or a place similar that has some connector trails to some cool sites or history to see along the way. I've only lollgagged about 650 miles of the AT so far, but those sections all had some of the tree painted with white stripes, so I just follow them : O )

wornoutboots
11-09-2012, 11:19
I do carry the "Appalachain Pages" guide book pages for the section I'm hiking.

jakedatc
11-09-2012, 12:45
In the Whites, are the trails not blazed with both the local trail name and the white blaze for the AT?


Not all of it. some of it has white blazes still. some portions, especially in designated wilderness areas do not. Losing *A* trail is not the issue, it is making sure you are on the correct one.

All of it DOES have great signage at trail junctions. so if you have the 4000'er map http://www.amazon.com/White-Mountains-Waterproof-Trail-Map/dp/1890060232
you're golden, cheap, waterproof, AT clearly labeled along with the real trail names. Plus once you are hooked on the views and awesome terrain you are set to come back :)

RED-DOG
11-12-2012, 15:26
You don't need maps for the AT their useless but makes great fire starters all you need is a Companion and follow the white blazes.

Blissful
11-12-2012, 15:31
It's tough when maps for hikers fall into the "optional" category. Or to make a senseless remark that they are no better than fire starters....

As far as Leave No Trace they are essential items.
But like essential items such as a sleeping, bag, food and a pack, you can certainly do without that too....

I blog (http://blissfulhiking.blogspot.com/2012/01/trail-maps-why-bother.html) on the map issue.

Lauriep
11-12-2012, 21:24
ATC maps are becoming more and more consistent over time. We have set map standards, and you'll notice that all the ones that are published by ATC are now becoming much more similar with the same features. With just a couple of exceptions, where local A.T.-maintaining clubs produce maps, those club-produced maps are considered the official A.T. maps. They may be quite different from ours and from each other. The Potomac A.T. Club publishes the official maps covering from Shenandoah National Park in Virginia to the Susquehanna River in PA. Day use is particularly heavy in these areas, and the maps are made with those trail users in mind. PATC maps are the only ones that are one-sided , except for one of the maps produced by Keystone Trails Association (KTA). KTA produces maps from the Susquehanna to Delaware Water Gap, PA, and the Maine A.T. Club does all of Maine. ATC cannot force these very independent organizations to follow our standards (although we encourage them to). It doesn't make sense for us to make competing maps, either.

It's actually pretty remarkable that ATC's maps have become as similar as they are today, considering how different from one another they have been in the past. (Does anyone remember the old black-and-white PA maps? Or how about the early PATC map that covered from Roanoke to the North Carolina border?) Trail-maintaining clubs help us with field data for all the maps, and they sometimes have strong ideas about what should and shouldn't be included and what the format should be. The clubs know their sections of Trail, who uses their trail, and what their trail hikers are looking for better than we do, and have some influence on what the maps in their area will look like. WhiteBlaze.net (at least judging by those who post) has a disproportionate number long-distance hikers compared to people who use the A.T. and purchase the maps.

In the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, National Geographic does a really good map which shows all the side trails.

It's complicated, but that's true about everything related to the A.T. when you look close. There are almost a hundred different federal, states, and local agencies that have some piece of the A.T., 31 affiliated but independent volunteer clubs with formal management responsibilities, and 40,000+ WhiteBlazers all with their own vision of what the A.T. should look like.

Laurie P.
ATC

melaniebk
11-12-2012, 22:08
ATC maps are becoming more and more consistent over time. We have set map standards, and you'll notice that all the ones that are published by ATC are now becoming much more similar with the same features. With just a couple of exceptions, where local A.T.-maintaining clubs produce maps, those club-produced maps are considered the official A.T. maps. They may be quite different from ours and from each other. The Potomac A.T. Club publishes the official maps covering from Shenandoah National Park in Virginia to the Susquehanna River in PA. Day use is particularly heavy in these areas, and the maps are made with those trail users in mind. PATC maps are the only ones that are one-sided , except for one of the maps produced by Keystone Trails Association (KTA). KTA produces maps from the Susquehanna to Delaware Water Gap, PA, and the Maine A.T. Club does all of Maine. ATC cannot force these very independent organizations to follow our standards (although we encourage them to). It doesn't make sense for us to make competing maps, either.

It's actually pretty remarkable that ATC's maps have become as similar as they are today, considering how different from one another they have been in the past. (Does anyone remember the old black-and-white PA maps? Or how about the early PATC map that covered from Roanoke to the North Carolina border?) Trail-maintaining clubs help us with field data for all the maps, and they sometimes have strong ideas about what should and shouldn't be included and what the format should be. The clubs know their sections of Trail, who uses their trail, and what their trail hikers are looking for better than we do, and have some influence on what the maps in their area will look like. WhiteBlaze.net (at least judging by those who post) has a disproportionate number long-distance hikers compared to people who use the A.T. and purchase the maps.

In the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, National Geographic does a really good map which shows all the side trails.

It's complicated, but that's true about everything related to the A.T. when you look close. There are almost a hundred different federal, states, and local agencies that have some piece of the A.T., 31 affiliated but independent volunteer clubs with formal management responsibilities, and 40,000+ WhiteBlazers all with their own vision of what the A.T. should look like.

Laurie P.
ATC
So, if you were thru hiking in 2013, and had no maps whatsoever, and knowing what you know- which would you buy- the entire set from the ATC, or assemble your own bits and pieces? Either way it's going to be costly and weighty, right?

FarmerChef
11-13-2012, 12:19
It's $225 for the whole map set (no books, except for Maine) at the ATC store. So it is a bit of expense. As for the weight that's completely manageable. Depending on your distance between resupply points you'd have to carry 2, possibly 3 but the weight for those 2 or 3 is only a few ounces (roast me now ULers :D). If you care about the grams, you might be able to trim them down a bit. When you hit the next stop throw it in your bump or leave it in a hiker box for someone else to use. Alternatively, you could mail them home. Not sure how expensive that becomes. For what it's worth, you have this very same problem with the AT guide or companion. You'll only want to take the pages for the section between each resupply. So you'll probably want to find a way to mail certain pages to yourself. The main difference between that and the maps is that once you're done with a page, you're done with it - permanently. Since they're updated annually anyway and low cost, we use ours to start a fire with or leave it in a hiker box along the way.

On a side note, I love taking out a map from a section I've already completed. It's covered in a thin patina of grime and still smells like the trail (or more accurately "I") did during the week I hiked that section. :)

melaniebk
11-13-2012, 17:54
Yeah, FarmerChef, I just threw that weight comment in for a lark. I tend to pack a little heavier than a lot of these other hikers. I'm really thinking of writing on the back of the maps as I go; use it for a journal, in other words. I asked Heulwen (my daughter) to have a look at the map choices for me. We'll decide together on which ones to use.

FarmerChef
11-14-2012, 14:35
Hey I resemble that remark! :p

Ok, seriously, as a section hiker I have done with and without the maps. Having covered a significant portion of the trail, I'll echo Moldy's comments about the ATC maps. The formats do change, some are one sided (why, oh why?), some are double sided, some cover large areas others cover so little that if you are lost it's almost impossible to orient yourself with a compass and the topo. Also, once you hit your stride and start pulling down larger miles you'll find yourself using a map for two or three days, then having to reach for another, then another and so on. Perhaps the most frustrating part, though, is that the elevation profile and map data can and (in my experience) have been very out of date rendering any planning for the day moot as the distance between shelters was longer/shorter/harder/easier. Trust the Companion or Guide for mileage distances and elevations, not the maps!

I always recommend having a map for safety but if you have the Companion or Guide you may find the maps more trouble than their worth. On my last big section (175 miles) I forgot the maps but had the Guide and Companion and didn't miss the maps. The elevation profile in the Guide is quite handy. That said, if, like others, you wind up in an emergency and need to get off trail, you'll be hard pressed without GPS or maps on a phone to find the shortest way to safety or help.

I realize in reading the responses I may not have typed this quite in the manner in which I intended it. The ATC does a GREAT service in having all of the maps available. And, in practice, I do hike with them 80% of the time. Like Moldy I keep mine in my front pocket and refer it to it frequently, though mostly for the elevation profile which I can now get from the Guide.

In all fairness to the ATC, I don't expect them to update the maps annually such that they are consistently in line with trail reroutes. I imagine that would be much too cost prohibitive. That said, I think folks unfamiliar with the maps should be aware that, in some cases, changes to the trail within the last few years may not have made it onto the map yet. If you're using the map as your primary planning tool, make sure to cross reference distance and location data with either of the updated guides or the Trail Data Book. And I understand the sensitivity to satisfying the needs of the local trail clubs and local consumers' preferences in order to help pay for the costs involved in producing the maps.

Laurie - I do hope that over time the maps become more and more consistent though I don't find the inconsistencies (except for one sided maps) that terrible. And as for those one sided PATC maps...I guess as a PATC member I'll have to take my sore spot up with them :P

fredmugs
11-14-2012, 15:45
As a section hiker I take the ATC maps and before I leave I take whatever info I think is relevant from the thru hikers guide and condense it into a single page Excel sheet. During the day I try hike for 50 - 60 minutes before taking a break so I really only use the map to pick out some spot to hike to and then take a break when I get there. I can only think of one time in the whites where I really needed to break out a map to figure out which way to go.

cliffordbarnabus
11-15-2012, 13:55
my maps are the white rectangles on the trees. i hate to know up down and flat or anything. anticipation isn't bliss. ignorance is.

rwaeger
11-15-2012, 15:23
I also don't plan to carry maps. Will use my guidebook and follow the blazes.

brooklynkayak
11-30-2012, 18:18
You can hike the AT without maps. You can also hike it without a compass, or a knife, or duct tape, or a shelter.

I highly advise against it.

Following the blazes only works when everything is fine, but there are too many times when the blazes are no help.

I run into a lot of people who took the wrong fork when they weren't paying attention and don't have a map. A lot of time can be wasted guessing where you are.

There are many cases where you willneed to get to water, resupply or emergency treatment off the trail, but don't know how to get there when you don't have a map.
You can't always rely on others and need to be self sufficient at times. You can't just follow blazes.

You can gamble and not take a map, but it you will have some times when you did have one and it's definitely not as safe.
And a GPS or smartphone are not a substitute. They can work, but not reliable.

Prime Time
11-30-2012, 18:31
I can't imagine hiking anywhere that I'm not 100% familiar with without a map. I have hiked in the White Mountains for over 40 years and still carry maps so that, for example, I can show all of the lost thru hikers where they need to go.

brooklynkayak
11-30-2012, 19:39
I run into lots of hikers lost without map or compass. My cabin is 10 miles from the AT and I am often shuttling people back to a trailhead or parking lot.
People are usually very upset and desperate at this point and don't understand how it was possible for them to get lost.

It can happen to anyone, no matter how sharp you think you are.

I will admit that I have become seperated from the trail many times. Once, even turned around going the wrong direction, but never was it a big deal as I almost always carry a map and compass.
I would have walked extra miles if I didn't have map or compass.

Sometimes looking at the white blazes can be hard in blowing rain or snow or when you have to watch the trail closely to avoid rocks and such. It can make it easy to miss your turn.

I remeber a few times in dry summers, being able to bushwack to water sources that I wouldn't have been able to find without a map. It sucks hiking in heat with no water for long distances because you don't know where your next water source is.

I once had to get off the trail long before the next road crossing when I sprained my ankle and was able to hobble to nearby road and hitch to a town. It could have been a distaster without a map.

Anyway, not many experienced hikers hike without a map. Some do, but that is part of the adventure for them.

rhw
01-14-2013, 15:57
Someone should make a tarp or ground cover with a detailed map of the trail...no added weight.

It would be great until it wears off.

MyName1sMud
01-14-2013, 17:19
AWOL's guide book pages


This is all you really need.

swjohnsey
01-14-2013, 18:42
My guess is that less than 10% of thru-hikers carry maps.

Nooga
01-15-2013, 10:49
No maps, just AWOLS guide. During my thru hike, I didn't see any people lost. The only section that was not clear was the Whites, where it seems that the AMC cannot adequately blaze the trail or have signs that are accurate. The signs had been corrected by hikers with sharpies.

tarjav83
03-11-2013, 15:38
What does "in the whites" mean? Where is "the whites"?

Wise Old Owl
03-11-2013, 16:02
New Hampshire's White Mountains.