View Full Version : It's called XUL or Extreme UltraLight!
Sub 4 pound pack for the truly weight conscience! Mike did OK at sub 5. Check out Glen's pack. I still have a few pounds to go....
http://www.gossamergear.com/cgi-bin/gossamergear/Photos_sub4.html
fiddlehead
08-21-2005, 01:14
I too went out and did the JMT a few summers ago with a guy who carried less than 4 lbs on his back. He seemed to have everything he needed except i think i would've added a fleece jacket. But he was a really big guy and didn't need the warmth quite as much as my skinny ass. I had a Go-Lite day pack and it weighed about 7 1/2 lbs and no one believed we were hiking the whole trail. after a while we just stopped trying to tell the truth. I did carry the stove and fuel and cookit ,which we shared. He was going to just eat uncooked food. (not for me)
SGT Rock
08-21-2005, 08:32
I have done the sub-5 thing and it is nice for some things, but not how I would always want to go. I've found that unless your trying to set speed records or you need to conserve weight on hiking gear to carry 40 pounds of tools, that there is a zone of weight comfort for base gear. For me it is 20-30 pounds total. If I can hack the weight with ease and comfort, then I find myself adding in stuff to have fun and be comfortable and still feel lightweight.
Bob Baker
08-21-2005, 09:17
Backpackinglight.com has run a series (3 i think) of articles describing theyre experiences with going superultralight. Overall what theyve said is that it is quite viable but like SGT Rock said they wouldn't do it all of the time. By the way, backpackinglight.com is a great website, basically a hiking magazine, and is well worth the thirty dollar anual subscription.
Lanthar Mandragoran
08-21-2005, 15:12
Backpackinglight.com has run a series (3 i think) of articles describing theyre experiences with going superultralight. Overall what theyve said is that it is quite viable but like SGT Rock said they wouldn't do it all of the time. By the way, backpackinglight.com is a great website, basically a hiking magazine, and is well worth the thirty dollar anual subscription.
At first, I thought it was somewhat of a ripoff to pay for the subscription on a site that sells gear. But, I do have to agree that I've gotten tons of benefit from being able to read the premium items, and I'll probably maintain my subscription indefinitely
Sub 4 pound pack for the truly weight conscience! Mike did OK at sub 5. Check out Glen's pack. I still have a few pounds to go....
Everyone should keep in the back of their minds the thought that an ultralighter likely died on the Pacific Crest Trail(?) in May, though the body has yet to be found.
Weary
Just Jeff
08-21-2005, 15:25
True. The Gossamer Gear guys make it extremely clear that folks should only go UL up to the level of their experience and expertise.
But even a hundred pounds of gear can't save an idiot who doesn't know how to use it.
Kerosene
08-21-2005, 15:36
I purchased a subscription to BackpackingLight.com (BPL) and have found it extremely valuable. The member discounts on ultralight equipment have probably paid for my first year's subscription. I'm definitely planning to renew.
David S.
08-21-2005, 23:13
Here's my take (or theory) on extreme ultralight and super ultralight. If backpacking could be considered an extreme sport, then I would consider extrem e ultralight to be in that realm. When approaching the sub 5 pound zones, your margin for error shrinks considerably. Just like in any extreme sport, the margins for error are critical. I think that small margin for error is part of the attraction for the extreme ultra lighters. I am sure that there must be a certain satisfaction in weathering out a storm....knowing that one bad decision could have lead to disaster. I would think that when you are at these extremes in pack weight, the success of your adventure begins to depend less on your gear and more on your ability to make proper decisions. Almost like a game of chess with mother nature. Every action you take will effect you for the good or bad down the road. In my mind, its almost worth considering this extreme type of backpacking a sport all its own.
I personally have no attraction or desire to reach these extremes...though I can understand how some may recieve a level of personal satisfaction from it.
tlbj6142
08-22-2005, 09:32
Everyone should keep in the back of their minds the thought that an ultralighter likely died on the Pacific Crest Trail(?) in May, though the body has yet to be found.That's right. Those carrying heavy packs never die.
Footslogger
08-22-2005, 10:48
That's right. Those carrying heavy packs never die.============================================
...they just feel like they did.
'Slogger
Here's my take (or theory) on extreme ultralight and super ultralight. If backpacking could be considered an extreme sport, then I would consider extrem e ultralight to be in that realm. When approaching the sub 5 pound zones, your margin for error shrinks considerably. Just like in any extreme sport, the margins for error are critical. I think that small margin for error is part of the attraction for the extreme ultra lighters. I am sure that there must be a certain satisfaction in weathering out a storm....knowing that one bad decision could have lead to disaster. I would think that when you are at these extremes in pack weight, the success of your adventure begins to depend less on your gear and more on your ability to make proper decisions. Almost like a game of chess with mother nature. Every action you take will effect you for the good or bad down the road. In my mind, its almost worth considering this extreme type of backpacking a sport all its own.
I personally have no attraction or desire to reach these extremes...though I can understand how some may recieve a level of personal satisfaction from it.
Some folks need to lighten the load as much as possible because physical reasons such as joint pain or back pain. Some others do it just to make their hiking easier and, therefore, more enjoyable. I think you have to strike a medium here and cut the weight to what is comfortable for you in both respects. (physical and enjoyment)
I won't be XUL. I can't see getting my base weight lower than 8 lb, 9 oz.
I think 8 lbs 9 oz is still in the "ultralight range" but I am not sure. It might be considered "lightweight." At this weight, I have everything to be very comfortable on the trail and light on my feet as well.
Interesting.
I find it just as interesting that most long distance thru-hikers who go the lightweighr route are in the 8-10 lb basepack range.
Seems the sub-7lbs are for shorter jaunts (weekend lengths?).
Just a rule of thumb though from what I've seen. I am sure there have been multimonth self-supported jaunts with lighter weights.
Youngblood
08-22-2005, 15:24
Definitions sometimes change due to technology, what people practice, morals at a particular time & place, etc. It can be difficult to figure out what is what when you are caught in a transitional period. Heck, I even found it tough to stay on the AT when they were it the middle of cutting over re-routes. Actually, most of life is a transitional period... go figure :jump
Youngblood
tlbj6142
08-22-2005, 15:33
Seems the sub-7lbs are for shorter jaunts (weekend lengths?)Folks are more willing to "put up" with a few issues on short hikes, that would probably drive them crazy on a long hike.
Ex:
I only bring one shirt (wear it 247), one pair of long pants (no thermals or rainwear), no "camp shoes" and rarely a camera for my 2-5 day hikes. But if I were to do a thru-hike, I'd probably bring all of them.
I think that you also can get caught up in a bit of a paradox there - the shorter hikes don't require much food, and therefore you can use a small pack. A longer hike, you have to take a larger pack, which is proportionally heavier. Then, as your food volume decreases, your big pack carries it's low-volume (generally goes along with ultralight) loads more and more badly. This could be partially remedied by an effective compression system on the pack, but that would add weight... and so it goes.
This problem obviously goes out the window with frequent resupplies.
Just Jeff
08-24-2005, 22:56
Or you compress your bag less and less to fill up the extra pack space.
HikeLite
08-26-2005, 14:01
I see it as more of a marketing strategery. When BPL started pushing the SUL wording they said they were not trying to define a new category of packing...yeah right. Now we have the GG twins challenging BPL's SUL with their own XUL for the naming of this new "category". Let's see who wins out!
I see it as more of a marketing strategery. When BPL started pushing the SUL wording they said they were not trying to define a new category of packing...yeah right. Now we have the GG twins challenging BPL's SUL with their own XUL for the naming of this new "category". Let's see who wins out!
It is why I am now against using the term "fastpacking". Used to mean doing big mile days to complete a trail in a short period of time.
Now, I've seen van supported trail runner use the term. Day hikers use the term and backpacker use the term.
I have nothing against trail running, day hiking or backpacking (I do all three!), but I do find the term "fast packing" has lost any real meaning. More of a marketing buzzword.
Do a google search on "day hiking" or "backpacking" or "trail running" you get links to clubs, trip ideas pictures, etc.
Google "fast packing" or "fastpacking" and the first links are gear companies or gear reviews. :-? 'Nuff said.
OK..off of my soapbox. :)
tlbj6142
08-26-2005, 15:40
I do find the term "fast packing" has lost any real meaning. More of a marketing buzzword.Just like the term ultralight. In the next issue of BP'r notice how often ultralight is used to describe a 3# tent!
However, I do think GoLite has made a good move (noted by the 3 part ads in BP'r) by switching away from "ultralight" and moving to "fast packing". As the former is still thought of as a dirty word leading to the death of packers. Whereas "fast packing" is just another thing for the Mt. Dew generation to latch on to. And, of course, spend money (sorry RJ).
Furthermore, GoLite (in part 3 of 3) made the point that hiking slow and light is also an option that is "better" than "traditional" hiking. All too often folks think that you must hike lots-o-miles if you are an ultralight hiker. That's just not true. The process of learning how to hike with fewer and lighter items benefits everyone (older folks with bad knees, folks with disabilites, folks with busy schedules, etc.), not just young kids doing thru-hikes.
Unfortunatley, many folks (I've been there, but I was able to stop) turn lightweight hiking into a "competition". I don't want a hobby that involves competition. I just want to have fun my way. Lightweight hiking let's me do just that.
Wolf - 23000
10-02-2005, 18:08
Safe, sub 4 pounds lightweight backpacking is very possible. I’ve done so for the last 15 years thru-hiking the AT, PCT multiple times as well as several other trails. The equipment and the idea is nothing new but it has to be done SAFELY. Back in 1993, a PCT hiker experimenting with lightweight backpacking froze to death. He had the equipment that could have saved his life but did not have the experience.
As David S said, “your margin for error shrinks considerably”. I agree with him 100% but I like add on to that a little. Safe ultra light backpacking which is what I have always encouraged, involves knowing what to do when things don’t go as we plan. For example: While hiking through the Sierras, CA with my little 4 pound book bag, I got snowed on. I thought it was funny that may Ray Jardine’s fans who call themselves “ultra-light” backpackers headed into town because they did not know what to do. They had the equipment to travel lightweight but did not have the knowledge to go with it.
I’m not going to tell anyone what they should or should not carry, or how to backpack as long as it is done safely.
Wolf
HikeLite
10-02-2005, 22:43
Wolf23000, so you thru hiked all those trails with sub 4 base weight?
Nightwalker
10-03-2005, 10:32
Wolf23000, so you thru hiked all those trails with sub 4 base weight?
If this is the Wolf that was an AT trail runner, his entire pack, including water and food, was 13 pounds. When asked how, the quote given was: "It's just enough for you to know that it can be done."
Wolf - 23000
10-05-2005, 19:03
Same Wolf and yes I thru-hike the AT and PCT during 3 seasonal normally with just under 4 pounds. I don't remember ever saying "It's just enough for you to know that it can be done." but I have refrain from answering question on what equipment I use mainly for safety.
I know a lot of hikers talk or write about what equipment is needed to travel ultra-light or use, but personal I think it is irresponsible to someone who has not develop the skills first. Some hikers have gotten themselves in trouble by traveling to light and unprepared.
I leave it up to the hiker to decide what equipment to carry and how much weight they feel safe carrying. If someone wants to travel lighter, they know better than anyone else what they needed and what they can do without.
Wolf
KS_Rockstar
10-05-2005, 19:18
^^that being said, just for purposes of compairison, what exactly do you cary?
KS_Rockstar
10-05-2005, 19:19
ps, the link at the top of the thred is not working for me, anybody else?
tlbj6142
10-05-2005, 21:17
Still works for me.
Just go to http://www.gossamergear.com and click on the "Extreme Ultralight" link in the left nav bar.
KS_Rockstar
10-05-2005, 21:52
got it, tnx.....
Wolf - 23000
10-16-2005, 13:59
Bugbomb and others,
You don’t need to carry any larger of a backpack on a long hike compare to a short week-end. To say so is just plain unknowledgeable on what equipment has been available for years. I’ve carried around 4 pounds of gear since 1989 while thru-hiking the AT, PCT, and LT fairly easy. The backpack I used was a book bag normal around 1,000 cu in - used by grade school children. During my 1997, thru-hike of the PCT my pack even had Mickey Mouse sewn on it.
What I don’t like about many “ultra-light backpacking” websites is many of their “experts” only go out for a short period. Most of us here have the skills to go one or two nights with next to nothing and be fine but on a long distance hike you have to be more prepare for more than ideal weather conductions.
Wolf
titanium_hiker
10-16-2005, 16:01
I agree wolf- the knowledge is the most important piece of gear you can carry. We've all heard of the people going into the wilderness carrying only a knife, some string and a flint. Now that is ultralight! (not LNT but anyway)
But who would reccomend that to city-raised people with lots of knowledge on how to cross a busy street, how to avoid being mugged/pickpocketed and how to buy a latte?
The knowledge is the key. you need to go light in gradual steps at your own pace- once you have the knowledge, the lighter you can go.
titanium
PS I'm city raised myself...
True. The Gossamer Gear guys make it extremely clear that folks should only go UL up to the level of their experience and expertise.
.
Experience is always valuable, but all the experience in the world won't necessarily save you if you carry gear suitable for 32 degrees and it turns zero or below, especially after a day or two of persistent drizzly, windy cold rain, with no quick escape route.
Very experienced people have died in the Whites and on Katahdin over the years after being surprised by unexpected weather changes. Others have survived only by endangering the lives of rescuers.
I prefer to carry an extra two or three pounds of emergency gear and make it home alive -- and unassisted.
Weary
lol...me thinks I have a long way to go.....my weight budget for my tent alone is 4lbs :D
I’ve carried around 4 pounds of gear since 1989 while thru-hiking the AT, PCT, and LT fairly easy..... Most of us here have the skills to go one or two nights with next to nothing and be fine but on a long distance hike you have to be more prepare for more than ideal weather conductions.
Wolf... would you mind posting what you took that's around 4 lbs. I can certain get to sub-5lb on extended trips with mild weather (temps >40F, the ability to dry out eventually, etc)... but not the full range of three seasons that I have experience on the long trails (were temps can drop to 15F, weeks of non-stop rain (well at least 10 days in the smokies, etc). When facing the full range of conditions I end up carrying something like 10lbs. I would love to what you are carrying.
But even more valuable would be any of the techniques / tricks / hacks you have discovered developped over the years. It would be cool to see just the title of skills/techniques that have been helpful to you, and even more interesting to see a full write-up. For example, the list of things I was planning to write up includes:
Using Map & Compass (http://www.princeton.edu/%7Eoa/manual/mapcompass.shtml)
Exertion and thermal management... e.g. change how hard I am working to keep me a comfort temp rather than adding/removing layers all the time.
Stride control - Vary stride length to adjust exertion and speed and keep cadence the same. Foot placement
Using hiking poles
Fording rivers
Travelling in snow
Camping in snow (dry clothing in winter (http://forums.backpacker.com/thread.jspa?threadID=56092&tstart=0))
Managing in the rain
Hygiene
Cooking & cleaning using alcohol stove (cozy use, using tea bag as a scrubber, etc)
Making a small cooking fire
Knot tying (http://www.folsoms.net/knots/)
Just Jeff
10-17-2005, 02:06
Experience is always valuable, but all the experience in the world won't necessarily save you if you carry gear suitable for 32 degrees and it turns zero or below, especially after a day or two of persistent drizzly, windy cold rain, with no quick escape route.
Very experienced people have died in the Whites and on Katahdin over the years after being surprised by unexpected weather changes. Others have survived only by endangering the lives of rescuers.
I agree.
I guess experience means different things to different people. To me, it means knowing how to keep yourself out of those situations in addition to a collection of a few skills to reduce the reliance on gear. Experience includes making sure you're prepared for conditions.
Ryan Jordan made it clear on his XUL trip that he had a bailout plan in case conditions got too bad for his gear. That's experience talking.
Wolf - 23000
10-17-2005, 19:57
Weary and others,
Where to begin? Experience is very valuable and can save your life even in your example Weary. I for one have survived a lot worst than your example. My last time was this past January while winter hiking the state of Maine. My water bottle broke inside my sleeping bag while I was 40 miles into the 100 mile wilderness; temperature -35. My sleeping bag had turn into a ball of ICE. Not a fun couple of nights but I survived because of my experience.
I know a lot of very experience hikers would not have made it which is one of the reasons I don’t like others trying to copy my style of hiking. I’m not trying to sound like I’m inventible because I’m not. I’ll be the first to say experience also means being smart about what you do. It was a bad situation that I couldn’t have planned for. When Sh#t hits the fan, it doesn’t matter what you have done in the past, or who trained you, who you are with, look at what you do have and utilize it. That is were experience comes into play, knowing what to do when things go really bad.
Verber and others I rather not post my gear list but I might put something together on some of your topic at a later date. Besides my equipment being quite out dated wish I slowly upgrading now, I like to let hikers travel how they like to without trying to imitate me. I travel how I do because the knowledge I gain from my own experience.
The tip that I will give is look at what you do have and don’t worry about what you don’t. When my water bottle broke inside my sleeping bag for example, I use my ice bag still to keep me warm - the ice was warmer than the outside temperatures 35 below, but also used my backpack and clothing inside my sleeping bag to create a barricade between me and the ice. The following days after hiking 15 to 18 miles a day, I built a snow caves to keep me warm at night. It wasn’t the ideal conditions, but it saved my life. Before any of you Rambos yahoos get any ideas they can do better hiking 15 miles, breaking snow the entire way while alone with a full pack in the winter is hard as hell!!! The next couple of days I pushed it hard to get into Monson; arriving on the 4 day. Pat Shaw saw me as a complete sheet of ice. My experience had saved my life.
Wolf
HikeLite
10-18-2005, 11:25
Wolf, I can do better.
Rambo Yahoo
vipahman
10-18-2005, 12:14
Wolf, I'm curious why the bottle broke? Frozen? And why was it inside the sleeping bag? It seems risky but you are the experienced one here. IMHO, it seems like you invited the situation upon yourself and then used your experience to get out of it. I'm not being cynical just observant. I'd love to know.
I always thought its a pretty standard practice to put your water in your bag when its very cold. Either you melt your 2-3 liters in the morning or do it at night and store it in the bag. Personally I do it at night so I can make a quick start in the morning. I guess I have done this maybe 200 nights without a problem.
Is there another option?
NoKnees
Alligator
10-18-2005, 21:40
I always thought its a pretty standard practice to put your water in your bag when its very cold. Either you melt your 2-3 liters in the morning or do it at night and store it in the bag. Personally I do it at night so I can make a quick start in the morning. I guess I have done this maybe 200 nights without a problem.
Is there another option?
NoKneesYou can bury the container in snow, which insulates. I wouldn't melt that much myself at night, on the off chance it might freeze and the work is wasted. But I will keep about a liter handy and in the bag below freezing. It's always nice to warm it up and use it as a hot water bottle. I try to make sure that I bring a gallon ziplock though to keep it in.
Since your water bottle broke, meaning it failed, it would be good to let us know what it was made of Wolf - 23000.
Wolf - 23000
10-19-2005, 10:11
Vipahman,
When in very cold temperatures it is common practice to place a water bottle in your sleeping bag with you. You are in your sleeping bag for 12 - 14 hours a day. It helps to keep up your strength and what water is left helps to get a good start in the morning when it below 0.
I’m not sure why my water bottle broke. It is the first time it has happen to me. The only thing I can think happen is while I was sleeping, I rolled over on top of it but I’m not total sure.
Another tip is using your cooking pot, fill it with any extra water that you have. At night it will freeze normal just on top. Place it on your stove to be reheated back to water. It helps to avoid getting out of your sleeping bag a little longer to gather snow/ice to be melted in water for the day.
Wolf
vipahman
10-19-2005, 12:21
My misunderstanding Wolf. I assumed it was packed in your bag during the hike because of extreme cold conditions, not during the night. I agree with placing the bottle in your bag while sleeping.
Alligator
10-19-2005, 14:32
Wolf - 23000, what type of water bottle were you using that broke?
Wolf - 23000
10-19-2005, 16:16
I was using my camp Nalgene bottle wide mouth 32 oz. I’ve used it for years winter hiking and never had a problem with it. I like to use it winter hiking mainly because of the wide mouth and it tolerance when placing hot water inside it. The lid/top had a crack on the side of it.
Wolf
Alligator
10-19-2005, 18:59
I was using my camp Nalgene bottle wide mouth 32 oz. I’ve used it for years winter hiking and never had a problem with it. I like to use it winter hiking mainly because of the wide mouth and it tolerance when placing hot water inside it. The lid/top had a crack on the side of it.
WolfThanks, I use one too when winter hiking, for the same reasons. I think its important to know if something has failed, even once. I appreciate your candor, even more so as I use that particular product.
This one is mostly for wolf-23000 But any advice is worth it.
I have had trouble keeping my bag dry on extended cold weather trips. I have an older pre dryloft marmot CWM. Its great for 2,3 or 4 days but on longer trips like 19 days (My winter Northville lake placid trail trip) it takes in quite a bit of mosture, Mostly from me but some from the external environment. my one saving grace is that the bag has lots of reserve warmth for most trips I go on.
I have not had luck in getting the bag to dry at low temps ( below 10F). The days are too short in upstate Ny in January to let it sit in the sun.
At times I have used a VBL but find them less than really comfortable. So wolf what have you found worked for you in similar circumstances.
NoKnees
Wolf - 23000
10-22-2005, 12:01
NoKnees,
As you know it is very difficult to dry something in the extreme winter. I like to use a VBL to help keep my bag dry as well as the extra warmth. There are only a couple ways I know of to dry thing out:
Most of the extra moister is coming from your clothing. So change into a dry pair of clothes as soon as possible and used only for sleeping. If you are just doing camp chores, melting snow, cooking, etc. stay in your hiking clothes but do so while inside your VBL with your sleeping bag unzipped overtop to keep you warm. Even if you don’t like sleeping in VBL to sleep in, I would suggest carrying one. It also severs as a good way to store your wet clothing inside your sleeping bag without getting your bag all wet and serves as a back up in an emergency.
In the morning shake off all the ice on the outside of your sleeping bag you can to keep as much moister from going inside your bag during the day.
In the limited sun light you do have try to place a black tarp underneath your sleeping bag turn inside out to help the moister from your body to get out. It will help dry things a little quicker.
Keep your clothes as dry as possible. I know that is hard. Sometimes that involves hiking while your clothes turn inside out. It helps more for the bulky clothing to get rid of the extra body moister trapped inside the fill. If you have a waterproof shell placed as close to your body as possible for warmth, and a wet item on the outside, it can also help to dry things out.
Hopes this helps,
Wolf
People seem to forget that for millions of years humans have been wandering around the wilderness carrying little or nothing. Far from being the fragile creatures that we are portrayed as in urban mythology, we are incredibly resilient. There's a little concept called 'evolutionary lag', which postulates that it takes around five thousand years for humans to biologically adapt to their environment and conditions, so if that's the case then we're are all biologically equipped for a hunter-gather existence even today. Those of us who are of northern Eurasian or high latitute/altitude native American extraction are also evolved for extreme cold.
I don't know much about itinerants/bums in US folk history, but here in Australia we had the 'swaggie', so called because of his 'swag' - a canvas sheet/tarp he carried as a bed/shelter. The basic swaggie equipment consisted of a 'swag' (sheet of canvas), a 'tucker bag' (sack for food), a 'billy' (a tin can with a wire bail handle), a cup, a spoon and the clothes they were wearing. Standard fare was tea, flour, salt pork and whatever they could catch, kill or find. That was it. And with that equipment they travelled on foot the length and breadth of Australia, from the tropical rainforests of the north, to the dry country of the centre and the alpine high country of the southeast. They managed. I've managed in summer in all weathers with a space blanket, a billy, a cup, a spoon and a nylon stuff sack to hold it all , along with pasta packs, muesli, milk powder, coffee and sugar. I can attest that waking up in the rain wrapped like a burrito, with slugs crawling across one's face is kind of gross, but other than that it was fun. You can still buy 'swags' in camping shops today, but they include a thick foam matress and bug netting. They tend to be about 70-100 litres in volume when rolled up, and weigh somewhere in the vicinty of 5-8 kilos. I'll bet that the old swaggies are rolling in their graves.
Of course swaggies certainly weren't 'ultralighters', since the canvas they used was heavy. However, they certainly travelled light for their day. A can with a bit of wire for a handle is still about as light as they come, but replace the swag with a silnylon poncho/tarp and a fleece blanket, the tin cup and spoon with lexan and the tucker bag with a small silnylon UL daypack, and you'd have a base packweight of under two kilos (4 1/2 lbs) and a total equipment cost of less than $200. What they had that we don't though is skills, and skills are the best weight savers of all. They learned their bushcraft from older swaggies and aboriginals, and knew the land as few do today. They also had the sense to stay out of snow country :)
The 'ultraest' of the primal ultralighters were the aboriginals. They travelled the length and breadth of the country in all weathers and seasons with nothing more than a spear, an (optional) loincloth and an encyclopedic knowledge of their environment. When it got cold they would just wrap the skin of their lunch around their shoulders and soldier on. Total pack weight? Zero. Now that's ultralight.
Somewhere along the line, the perfectly natural function of travelling through wild country became an 'adventure sport', and like all sports it now 'requires' loads of expensive, flashy equipment and is subject not only to arbitrary rules and regulations, but to uninformed criticism from the mass media and the masses in general. Our loss.
In temperate climes we are at least theoretically capable of heading into the wilderness with nothing more than a knife, the clothes on our backs and our 'mad skills'. Anything else is at best a luxury, and at worst a consumerist delusion engendering a false sense of security. For myself, it's about staying relatively comfortable for much of the time. For others their expansive bag of name-branded, glowingly-reviewed, hi-tech sporting equipment is more in the vein of 'insurance' against their own inabilty to percieve reality in a way that is consistent with the demands of the natural world. Every fool that gets into trouble because they counted on their gear to make up for their bad decisions brings us closer to the day when we need licenses and insurance before we're permitted to walk off the pavement.
Life is dangerous, but the alternative is rather dull.