inconsiderate vs ignorant

[MuddyWaters]

got to the grand canyon and hiked. it stressed there as part of the trail ettiquette. as another has said here, google it and you'll see as well.its a rule.many many people are ignorant of it. but it is a rule. i suppose one day if enough people continue to ignore it itll cease to be a rule.

I bet I yielded to 100-200 people coming down from trailcrest after Whitney. By halfway down the 99 switchbacks, I was ready to kick every person coming up between their legs. Also f'in tired of giving nice cheerful greetings.

[tdoczi]

I bet I yielded to 100-200 people coming down from trailcrest after Whitney. By halfway down the 99 switchbacks, I was ready to kick every person coming up between their legs. Also f'in tired of giving nice cheerful greetings.

all that proves is a lot of ignorant people hike on mt whitney. never been, from everything ive heard that sounds about right.

[rickb]

uphill has the right of way is most definitely a "basic thing." it is, in fact, one of the first "rules" of hiking i ever learned. the fact that all of you are ignorant of it doesnt prove that it isnt basic, it proves that you are, as the person who brought it up would suggest, ignorant (as many are) of what is indeed a very basic rule of hiking etiquette.

Serious question:

About when did this rule of etiquette come into being?

I became an Eagle Scout in 1976, so I am thinking that I got my hiking merit badge a few years earlier.

Pretty sure this rule was not well established back then, though I suppose it is possible.

[admirald7s]

got to the grand canyon and hiked. it stressed there as part of the trail ettiquette. as another has said here, google it and you'll see as well.its a rule.many many people are ignorant of it. but it is a rule. i suppose one day if enough people continue to ignore it itll cease to be a rule.

From my point of view, a rule without a consequence for breaking it is really just a guideline. Maybe particular parks encourage (and perhaps even enforce) this "rule," but I've never heard of it until this thread.

As others have mentioned, I also examine each encounter individually. It's really not challenging to figure out who has the easier time of stepping aside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sarcasm the elf]

This is just getting silly. If you feel like you need to have a "rule" to tell you how to properly walk past another human being on something as leisurely as the appalachian trail then you might want to take some time to work on your ability to play nice with others...

[Sarcasm the elf]

From my point of view, a rule without a consequence for breaking it is really just a guideline. Maybe particular parks encourage (and perhaps even enforce) this "rule," but I've never heard of it until this thread.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Amazingly I managed to hike in the woods for the past near 30 years, spend hundreds of nights in the woods and earn the rank of Eagle scout without ever having difficulty figuring out how to walk past another hiker. Never had an issue*, not once.




*With the exception of the 40-plus person tour bus leafer groups on bear mountain, but that's a different issue.

[tdoczi]

Serious question:

About when did this rule of etiquette come into being?

I became an Eagle Scout in 1976, so I am thinking that I got my hiking merit badge a few years earlier.

Pretty sure this rule was not well established back then, though I suppose it is possible.

dont know. as i said it is a point of emphasis at the grand canyon and other such places. and another poster mentioned it before i did and backed it up with an internet reference.

its a thing. because youve never heard of it doesnt mean it isnt. is it commonly practiced? obviously not. does make it not so.

[tdoczi]

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...going%20uphill

myself and the other person who bought it up are not just imagining things. sorry to break it to all of you

[tdoczi]

or even easier. click ehre and read rule #1-

http://www.backpacker.com/skills/beg...ail-etiquette/

yeah yeah i know. disregard it because its backpacker magazine. whatever.

[colorado_rob]

blah, blah, blah.... sorry to break it to all of you

What a piece of work. And what a sleuth, finding all those links that we all know what is said already! Wow, impressive.

But sorry, as said below, there is no "rule", given that there is no "hiking authority", it's just a common convention which really never comes into play except in the minds of the self-righteous, and multi-posters (those that make multiple posts in a row, hoping beyond hope that we actually read their vast insight).

[tdoczi]

lots of you folks are big REI fans, right? maybe you'll beleive them if you dont like backpacker magazine? scroll down to hikers vs hikers

http://blog.rei.com/hike/trail-etiqu...-right-of-way/

but of course im really just wasting my time. theres no way any of you can possibly not know something and you can be shown 2 million citations and you'll stillinsist that since YOU never heard of it, it must not be so.

love the human race.

[tdoczi]

What a piece of work. And what a sleuth, finding all those links that we all know what is said already! Wow, impressive.

But sorry, as said below, there is no "rule", given that there is no "hiking authority", it's just a common convention which really never comes into play except in the minds of the self-righteous.

umm ll of these things are "common conventions" and not actual "laws." not taking a dump in a spring isnt a law, its etiquette. not getting up at 2 am and screaming for everyone to wake up isnt a law, its a convention. ist etiquette.

next pointless statement instead of just admitting there was something you didnt know?

[Sarcasm the elf]

People can try to make up whatever nonsense they want, they can even try to popularize it, but unless the idea can stand on it's own merits and has a real purpose then it's still nothing more than nonsense.

Yielding to horses or downhill bike/runners has a merit because it is a prudent safety precaution. Arguing about which of two slow moving hikers has the right of way is little more than a mix of ego and a likely need for authority.

In other words.

[tdoczi]

People can try to make up whatever nonsense they want, they can even try to popularize it, but unless the idea can stand on it's own merits and has a real purpose then it's still nothing more than nonsense.

Yielding to horses or downhill bike/runners has a merit because it is a prudent safety precaution. Arguing about which of two slow moving hikers has the right of way is little more than a mix of ego and a likely need for authority.

In other words.

look, i'm not even advocating whether the convention has merit or is worthwhile. but to claim it isnt a convention is demonstrably not true, no matter how much you try and deny it.

[theinfamousj]

I am well aware of the trail etiquette of giving way to those climbing, but I wondered if anyone knows why it evolved? Seems counterintuitive and a bit arbitrary.

It is harder to stop when going down a steep grade, especially on the knees, and similarly going up a steep grade affords a brief chance to rest if you can pause for a passerby. Or at least that has always been my experience. So clearly, I am missing something here as well?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[tdoczi]

I am well aware of the trail etiquette of giving way to those climbing, but I wondered if anyone knows why it evolved? Seems counterintuitive and a bit arbitrary.

It is harder to stop when going down a steep grade, especially on the knees, and similarly going up a steep grade affords a brief chance to rest if you can pause for a passerby. Or at least that has always been my experience. So clearly, I am missing something here as well?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

the theory (again, not advocating it, it isnt my theory, i'm just repeating what is commonly said, is that it is easier for the downhill person to stop and then start up again then it is for the uphill hiker. if the uphill hiker wants to rest and yield the right of way, he/she can, but it is the uphill hiker's decision, not the downhill hiker's.

perhaps the confusion is not underdtanding what having the "right of way" means. this isnt saying it is a rule that the uphill hiker MUST keep going and the downhill hiker MUST stop. it is that who stops and who goes is at the discretion of the uphill hiker, not the downhill hiker.

but again, i'm not espousing this rule or criticizing anyone who doesnt follow it, thinks its stupid, etc etc. but it is a rule of hiking etiquette, and if you don't know it, sorry, but you are ignorant.

its ok, accept it. learn something. itll be alright.

[Sarcasm the elf]

look, i'm not even advocating whether the convention has merit or is worthwhile. but to claim it isnt a convention is demonstrably not true, no matter how much you try and deny it.

I know that some people advocate for it, my argument is that it doesn't have any merit. I could see a congested and heavily managed place such as the grand canyon needing extra guidelines to properly manage their trails and allow better management of the huge number of hikers they see in a fragile environment, but I don't think that it translates to a need for it on other trails.
In addition to that having downhill hikers yielding to uphill hikers just doesn't make sense since they have gravity working against them, which is why both bikers and trail runners yield way to people going downhill. Personally I just slow down and say hi to everyone I meet, since while it may not be obvious from my posts on this site, I'm a nice person in real life.

[tdoczi]

I know that some people advocate for it, my argument is that it doesn't have any merit. I could see a congested and heavily managed place such as the grand canyon needing extra guidelines to properly manage their trails and allow better management of the huge number of hikers they see in a fragile environment, but I don't think that it translates to a need for it on other trails.
In addition to that having downhill hikers yielding to uphill hikers just doesn't make sense since they have gravity working against them, which is why both bikers and trail runners yield way to people going downhill. Personally I just slow down and say hi to everyone I meet, since I'm a nice person in real life.

you're absolutely entitled to that perspective. you might be right. i'm not getting into that argument

however, uphill hiker has the right of way **IS** an established rule of hiking etiquette.

if someone knows this, thinks its dumb and chooses to ignore it, thats one thing. if someone doesnt know it, its ignorant.

the argument "ive never heard of it, therefore it isnt a rule" is just... i cant describe it in polite language.

[rickb]

Often times two hikers can hike past one another without stopping.

Do the rules say each of us should always stay to the right even if the trail is slabbing a slope?

If we are going in the same direction, does etiquette demand I say "on your left" or it that just assumed?

[tdoczi]

Often times two hikers can hike past one another without stopping.

Do the rules say each of us should always stay to the right even if the trail is slabbing a slope?

If we are going in the same direction, does etiquette demand I say "on your left" or it that just assumed?

as for the first question, if there is no need to yield the point would seem to be moot.

as for the other's, i dont know. if there are rules of etiquette that address those things, i am ignorant of them.

see how easy that was?