2010 Appalachian Trail Circle Expedition

[Pokey2006]

Yes, the same distance is harder with a heavier pack. So what? It's kind of like the guys in high school who had to have the biggest car to make up for their other limitations. Who cares how heavy the pack is or how hard the hike is?

Some of the hardest hikes I've ever done have been day hikes, as opposed to backpacks. On a backpack, you can always cut your day short and set up came. Can't do that on a day hike.

Still, they're both HIKING, just with varying weights in the backpack. So what? Who cares?

[Alligator]

OK, I had suggested that admin move this thread, as the opening post was more suited to this forum. Notice that the background is white. That will require posts to be more strictly concerned with the details of this endeavor.

[Frosty]

I took issue with Frosty's comparison of the three day backpacking trip to that of a three day supported hike. They are different as you point out. You admittedly state one is harder. Thanks for agreeing that it's not the same comparison.

I thought you were a moderator. Sarcasm and digs aren't appropriate if you are.

Sarcasm wouldn't be necessary if you had read my post with an intent to understand what I wrote rather than looking for something to support your predetermined viewpoint.

I did not compare three dayhikes to a three day backpack. I said the next preparation hike is a three-day backpack of 63 miles. It was in response to A-Train's comment that people who cannot carry backpacks might gravitate toward this type of hike. It is much easier to hike 63 miles without a pack than with, but backpacking is part of the Expedition and a major part of preparation for it.

I said also that if you are thinking of the Expedition slacks as traditional slackpacks with a night's stay at an inn and other amenities at both ends you are mistaken. Please understand that before misquoting me again. You are a moderator, no?

This is probably a fool's errand on my part, but to summarize, a slack pack where you wake up in a tent in the woods, cook breakfast on your stove, break camp and carry your pack to a van, hike 20 miles, get your pack from the van, carry your gear into the woods, make camp and eat, sleep in your tent, and repeat day after day after day, 20 miles at a whack, is what we are talking about. Not getting picked up at a trailhead for a ride to indoor lodging.

The trade-off we are talking about are high miles, long days, every day in exchange for a lighter pack. There isn't an easier about it. What is gained by carrying a lighter pack is offset by the longer days and the lack of rest days.

This is obviously not for everyone. If you can't stand a schedule, if you need a rest day once a week, if you cannot continue to hike when sore, if you can't commit beforehand to finish and not quit because it gets hard or you get bored, then no, don't do it. If you are interested in having a lighter load while you are in the woods and still camp every night and still walk every foot of the trail, then maybe. Contact Warren if it sounds like something you might like but aren't sure.

I don't know if I will do the 2010 Expedition. Like so many things in life, the greatest benefit is also the biggest problem. The thing I like best is the schedule and the thing I like least is the schedule.

The schedule will have me hike in four months rather than the six I would likely take. I'm now self-employed and not only will I lose money while away, as any self-employed person knows I will lose clients and "momentum" as well, and be starting almost from scratch. Being away only four months would mitigate that to some degree. On the other hand, I'm 61 years old and I get sore after a long day or after multiple days of hiking. I don't know it I can handle hiking 18-20 miles a day, every day, without a bunch of rest days, both planned and unplanned. A-Train (I think it was him) said that any group is a microcosm of society, good and bad. This is true, but so far, I have found almost all the prospective members of the 2010 Expedition to be pleasant and friendly people, and a joy to hike with. If there is a PITA, I'm afraid it might be me.

There is a lot of criticism floating around based on a lack of knowledge and rancor. I can't do anything about the latter, but I wanted to try to give a look at both sides from someone who has been backpacking a lot, and who has at least a rudimentary knowledge of how the Expeditions work. Sometimes it is helpful to be familiar with both sides of something to fully understand it. Kind of a walk a mile in my shoes kind of thing. Before you abuse, criticize and accuse. (Cookerhiker? Attribution here?)

[Marta]

Like so many things in life, the greatest benefit is also the biggest problem. The thing I like best is the schedule and the thing I like least is the schedule.

That's really well put, Frosty.

A lot of this "discussion" in which everyone else's hike is dissed, except for whoever is writing, reminds me of a Russian saying:

Better my cow should die than my neighbor should have two.

A long hike is such a complicated mix of physical, financial, emotional, and mental challenges that it seems ridiculous to try to judge others' hikes. They hike it; they have to live with whatever decisions they make to complete it, or not complete it. None of my business.

[Alligator]

The relevant references to your introduction of the prep hike are quoted below.

...
And hiking about 20 miles a day, every day. Starting from Day One. People who "do not want to rough it" as you say, do not commit to hiking that much each and every day from the get-go. And the prepaation hikes would quickly weed out such people anyway. The next prepartion hike starts at Linden and goes 63 miles in 3 hiking days. That's a load for someone who has been on the trail for months. For those who section hike and do weekend trips, anyone think this is the softer, easier way? I don't.

....

Anyway, I've hiked traditionally, and done some of slacking Warren-style, and Warren's way is tougher.

Anyone who thinks otherwise ought to come on the 63-mile, 3 day backpack with us.

You say, Warren-style is tougher (last section), then say come on a 63 mile backpack trip. Warren-style is van supported. That's how it was written. I was just following your comparison.

I thought you were a moderator. Sarcasm and digs aren't appropriate if you are.

I restated her position. However, what you have quoted was removed by me when this thread was moved. I thought it would be fairer that way. You grabbed it while the thread was not in this forum. I'm going to leave it there though, so this exchange makes sense.

I said also that if you are thinking of the Expedition slacks as traditional slackpacks with a night's stay at an inn and other amenities at both ends you are mistaken. Please understand that before misquoting me again. You are a moderator, no?

Sarcasm is ok if you do it? I see. Anyway, I never refered to the expedition as slackpacking. Again, I was following your "you hiked traditionally" and "slacking Warren-style" statement, which was immediately followed by the "anyone who thinks otherwise comment". You are asking folks to determine the difference by going on a backpacking trip. I still don't think that a comparison could be made by doing that.

No I did not misread your post.

[the goat]

I thought you were a moderator. Sarcasm and digs aren't appropriate if you are.

sarcasm & digs aren't out of bounds; sarcasm is a great (and often humorous) way to get your point across.

i hate hiking with vans. (see i'm on topic too!)

[Cookerhiker]

......There is a lot of criticism floating around based on a lack of knowledge and rancor. I can't do anything about the latter, but I wanted to try to give a look at both sides from someone who has been backpacking a lot, and who has at least a rudimentary knowledge of how the Expeditions work. Sometimes it is helpful to be familiar with both sides of something to fully understand it. Kind of a walk a mile in my shoes kind of thing. Before you abuse, criticize and accuse. (Cookerhiker? Attribution here?)

Frosty, what needs attribution here? Your ideas and words are your own.

[Lilred]

sarcasm & digs aren't out of bounds; sarcasm is a great (and often humorous) way to get your point across.

i hate hiking with vans. (see i'm on topic too!)

I think I'd like hiking with van's Van Morrison, Van Halen, Vanna White. (that's for the guys)......Van Camp baked beans..hmmm......

[Frosty]

Frosty, what needs attribution here? Your ideas and words are your own.

You had the song title to some words someone else used, so of course I tried to incorporate song lyrics into my posts. In this case, the "abuse, criticize and accuse" came from:

If I could be you and you could be me for just one hour
If we could find a way to get inside each other's mind
If you could see you through my eyes instead of your ego
I believe you'd be surprised to see that you'd been blind

Walk a mile in my shoes, walk a mile in my shoes
Yeah, before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Walk a mile in my shoes

Well, your whole world you see around you is just a reflection
And the law of common sense says you're gonna reap just what you sow
So unless you've lived a life of total perfection
Mm-mm, you'd better be careful of every stone that you should throw

Yet we spend the day throwin' stones at one another
'cause I don't think or wear my hair same way you do
Well, I may be common people but I'm your brother
And when you strike out and try to hurt me it's a 'hurtin you

Walk a mile in my shoes, walk a mile in my shoes
Yeah, before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Walk a mile in my shoes

There are people on reservations and out in the ghettos
And brother, there, but for the grace of God, go you and I
If I only had the wings of little angels don'tcha you know I'd fly
To the top of the mountain and then I'd cry?

Walk a mile in my shoes, walk a mile in my shoes
Hey, before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Better walk a mile in my shoes

Walk a mile in my shoes, walk a mile in my shoes
Oh, before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Walk a mile in my shoes

Walk a mile in my shoes, walk a mile in my shoes
Hey, before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Walk a mile in my shoes

[Jack Tarlin]

Hmmm.....

Interesting debate.

I know all sorts of folks who, if they had to slackpack 20-odd miles a day after a few weeks or months of hiking moderate-to-difficult terrain with a backpack, well, they wouldn't have much of a problem with it. See, they're in pretty good shape, and covering this distance with a quart of Gatorade and a tangerine wouldn't exactly wear them out.

But if we took folks who'd had car support for two or three months, who then had to hike14-18 miles a day (i.e average A.T backpacking pace after a few months) with a full load for more than a few days, well, sorry, I think they'd have a problem.

If I'm mistaken, Mr. Doyle, then please tell us how many days your "expedition" people carry their own stuff, and for how long; also, what is the longest period they're under their own power and not relying on automotive support.

In short, anyone suggesting that a car-supported thru-hike is more arduous than one done by folks who actually suffer the indignity and difficulty (oh horrors!) of carrying their own pack, is ridiculous.

Note to Mr. Doyle: If you don't want to answer this, as you generally make a practice of avoiding my direct questions, then I'll simply publish the schedule of your last "expedition."

But I'll give you the chance to answer for yourself. If you wanna show us how rough your people allegdedly have it, and if you want to tell us where and when they actually have to go without car support and carry their own stuff, then feel free to tell us.

If you don't want to tell us, well we kinda understand that, too.

[Frosty]

But I'll give you the chance to answer for yourself. If you wanna show us how rough your people allegdedly have it, and if you want to tell us where and when they actually have to go without car support and carry their own stuff, then feel free to tell us.

Actually, I was the one who said that I didn't think I could keep up with the pace of the Expedition, not Warren. It was my personal evaluation of my own ability, and I still think that the level of efforts of both ways of hiking one's hike are pretty tough.

I think I said there was a trade-off between doing long miles and hiking with a backpack. Like someone said earlier, this type of hike is similar to what bike riders have been doing for years. They long ago found out that what they like to do is ride bikes and see the sights. Loading themselves down with gear, and reducing the amount of scenery they can ride by was not their main goal. So they use a sag wagon. It merely allows them to cover more ground than they would if they had all thier gears on panniers.

Using panniers and using a sag wagon is a matter or personal choice. So is hiking with or without a backpack. I don't understand why people are so up in arms at other people's hikes?

What's the big deal?

[rickb]

In short, anyone suggesting that a car-supported thru-hike is more arduous than one done by folks who actually suffer the indignity and difficulty (oh horrors!) of carrying their own pack, is ridiculous.

To my way of thinking, the difficulty of any individual's hike is very much beside the point.

The most remarkable achievement is being able to lead a group down the AT, from start to finish with little or no attrition.

To do this once might be luck.

To do it over and over says a great deal about the program and its leader.

Perhaps its no a coincidence that the participants in Mr. Doyle's seminars also enjoy a remarkably high end-to-end completion rate on their individual treks.

[OregonHiker]

To my way of thinking, the difficulty of any individual's hike is very much beside the point.

The most remarkable achievement is being able to lead a group down the AT, from start to finish with little or no attrition.

To do this once might be luck.

To do it over and over says a great deal about the program and its leader.

Perhaps its no a coincidence that the participants in Mr. Doyle's seminars also enjoy a remarkably high end-to-end completion rate on their individual treks.

I think the lack of alcohol and tobacco may be significant factor

[Alligator]

Since we've got about 1.5+ years to go on this shindig.

One question about these trips that I've never gotten a complete answer on is the completion rates. Warren typically cites the circle member completion rate. I think people could get a better picture if he'd present the total number of people who start at Springer and receive support from the van and the number that complete the entire trail. The numbers have seemed to me to have been parsed in the past.

For instance I'd be interested in this sort of breakdown.
13 people started at Springer. 8 were part of the circle. All 13 had their stuff in the expedition's van. 10 people hiked the entire trail, 8 were circle members. 1 of the 3 who didn't hike the entire trail made it up Springer but took the canoe. One person dropped off due to a death in the family, and one person skipped 200 miles.

I think that's a fair question. I'm simply asking for factual information so that interested parties can make an informed decision.

[Alligator]

Also, when we look to compare these completion rates, have there been other group van supported hikes to compare them too? I've said in the past the numbers cited have been very high. Have there been other groups conducted similarly such that it can be compared?

[Speer Carrier]

Warren says his members are self selected, and the "self selection process" pretty much guarantees a mentally and physically tough group of people. His self selection process reminds me of my high school football coach. He never cut anyone from the team, even it was a large school (New Bedford Mass) and he had at least four times as many people try out as he could use. He simply made the practices harder and harder until enough people dropped out. What was left were people who really really wanted to be on the team. I think that is a good part of Warren's success. The other part is a commitment to friends, which I shan't comment on here, but your mentioning comraderie is part of it.

This is way off the subject, but I spent my senior year of high school at Durfee High School in Fall River, MA. That year,1960, I played on the football team that was playing New Bedford High School in the golden anniversary game. Durfee won, but from what I heard it was a fluke. Ordinarily, New Bedford kicked our butts. Was that the school you attended?

[warren doyle]

Since we've got about 1.5+ years to go on this shindig.

One question about these trips that I've never gotten a complete answer on is the completion rates. Warren typically cites the circle member completion rate. I think people could get a better picture if he'd present the total number of people who start at Springer and receive support from the van and the number that complete the entire trail. The numbers have seemed to me to have been parsed in the past.

For instance I'd be interested in this sort of breakdown.
13 people started at Springer. 8 were part of the circle. All 13 had their stuff in the expedition's van. 10 people hiked the entire trail, 8 were circle members. 1 of the 3 who didn't hike the entire trail made it up Springer but took the canoe. One person dropped off due to a death in the family, and one person skipped 200 miles.

I think that's a fair question. I'm simply asking for factual information so that interested parties can make an informed decision.

1975 Expedition - 19 people joined the circle - all 19 finished the entire trail

1977 Expedition - 14 people joined the circle - 11 people finished the entire trail
the circle was broken at the base of Bromley in Vermont
(the remaining three finished within two years)

1980 Expedition - 14 people joined the circle - all 14 people finished the entire trail

1990 Expedition -12 people joined the circle - all 12 people finished the entire trail

1995 Expedition - 9 people joined the circle - all 9 people finished the entire trail

2000 Expedition - 6 people joined the circle - all 6 people finished the entire trail

2005 Expedition - 3 people joined the circle - all 3 people finished the entire trail

Seven circle expeditions - six unbroken circles atop Katahdin

[warren doyle]

Also, when we look to compare these completion rates, have there been other group van supported hikes to compare them too? I've said in the past the numbers cited have been very high. Have there been other groups conducted similarly such that it can be compared?

All other van-supported group thru-hikes (3 or more people) along the AT (and there have been only a handful) have either imploded along the way of have not had 100% completion rates (finishing with the same people you started with).

[Pokey2006]

But I'll give you the chance to answer for yourself. If you wanna show us how rough your people allegdedly have it, and if you want to tell us where and when they actually have to go without car support and carry their own stuff, then feel free to tell us.

If you don't want to tell us, well we kinda understand that, too.

Oh, there's no alleged about it -- this expedition is, indeed, going to be tough. Yes, I am hoping to be part of it. The challenge of it -- rather than the "easiness" -- is a big part of WHY I want to do it.

And, yes, I know the difference between traveling with van support and traveling with a full pack. I hiked most of the AT as a backpacker. I've hiked in the Himalayan mountains with a full pack, when everyone else hired porters and guides. I enjoy day hiking, but I also enjoy backpacking.

Honestly, I believe this expedition will be the hardest hike I've done yet.

Why, you want to know? A few reasons:

--High mileage nearly every single day, with a few days that I right now consider nuts. Examples: Pinkham Notch to Route 2 (over the Wildcats and Carters) in one day. 23 miles from Fontana into the Smokys as day one of a two-day backpack.
--No days off until Hanover. That's no days off until Hanover flippin' NH! Then only one more day off after that, in Monson.
--Inability to take time off if sick with the flu, exhausted, mentally depleted. Exceptions are made, of course, for injuries and serious illnesses or things like a death in the family.

So what's harder, hiking with a full pack, or only taking two days off on the whole journey? What's harder, carrying your tent, or not being able to stop for the night when you're exhausted? What's harder, staying "pure," or wandering off on your own to explore blue blazes, yellow blazes and aqua blazes?

To answer your question directly, there are only a few backpacks on the actual expedition.

1. Fontana to Newfound Gap, 42 miles in two days (10 miles without pack)
2. Newfound Gap to Davenport Gap, 30 miles in two days (plus another few miles without pack)
3. There's a short one in Pennsylvania, between Duncannon and Port Clinton
4. Franconia Ridge -- two days, Franconia Notch to Crawford Notch.
5. Three days on NH-Maine border.

But so what? Are the expedition members really all that much different from ultra-lighters? At what weight limit do you draw the line or make a distinction? Actually, I think some of us on the practice hikes had packs that were HEAVIER than some ultralight backpackers.

Jack, I understand you don't like Warren. That's fine. I can even understand why, and don't blame you for it. But please don't trash this endeavor just because you don't like its leader. I honestly believe this is an extremely challenging undertaking, and don't see how anyone can say otherwise.

[Fannypack]

Oh, there's no alleged about it -- this expedition is, indeed, going to be tough. Yes, I am hoping to be part of it. The challenge of it -- rather than the "easiness" -- is a big part of WHY I want to do it.

And, yes, I know the difference between traveling with van support and traveling with a full pack. I hiked most of the AT as a backpacker. I've hiked in the Himalayan mountains with a full pack, when everyone else hired porters and guides. I enjoy day hiking, but I also enjoy backpacking.

Honestly, I believe this expedition will be the hardest hike I've done yet.

Why, you want to know? A few reasons:

--High mileage nearly every single day, with a few days that I right now consider nuts. Examples: Pinkham Notch to Route 2 (over the Wildcats and Carters) in one day. 23 miles from Fontana into the Smokys as day one of a two-day backpack.
--No days off until Hanover. That's no days off until Hanover flippin' NH! Then only one more day off after that, in Monson.
--Inability to take time off if sick with the flu, exhausted, mentally depleted. Exceptions are made, of course, for injuries and serious illnesses or things like a death in the family.

So what's harder, hiking with a full pack, or only taking two days off on the whole journey? What's harder, carrying your tent, or not being able to stop for the night when you're exhausted? What's harder, staying "pure," or wandering off on your own to explore blue blazes, yellow blazes and aqua blazes?

To answer your question directly, there are only a few backpacks on the actual expedition.

1. Fontana to Newfound Gap, 42 miles in two days (10 miles without pack)
2. Newfound Gap to Davenport Gap, 30 miles in two days (plus another few miles without pack)
3. There's a short one in Pennsylvania, between Duncannon and Port Clinton
4. Franconia Ridge -- two days, Franconia Notch to Crawford Notch.
5. Three days on NH-Maine border.

But so what? Are the expedition members really all that much different from ultra-lighters? At what weight limit do you draw the line or make a distinction? Actually, I think some of us on the practice hikes had packs that were HEAVIER than some ultralight backpackers.

Jack, I understand you don't like Warren. That's fine. I can even understand why, and don't blame you for it. But please don't trash this endeavor just because you don't like its leader. I honestly believe this is an extremely challenging undertaking, and don't see how anyone can say otherwise.

Thx for this info.

I often disagree with Warren when it comes to the content of his posts but there are 2 things that I must agree with:

• the hike u describe above is in fact very physically demanding besides the mental stress involved with hiking/camping with the same persons for the duration of the hike (these are my words and I would expect Warren would agree)
• also persons that claim to hike the entire trail should hike the entire trail