Is the current breed of AT hiker soft?

[Desert Lobster]

1. light weight high-tec gear
2. many more hostels
3. blue and yellow blazing becoming prevalent
4. slack packing
5. increased info on the net and in libraries and bookstores
6. switchbacks in difficult areas
7. cell phones: "I just have to talk to a loved one!"
8. more hikers on the AT to lend encouragement and a social atmosphere

[Lone Wolf]

All of the above.

[Tabasco]

Hear Hear! We need more Luddites in the world...

compared to Grandma Gatewood, you're all a bunch of raving lunatic gearheads!

[Footslogger]

At 54, I'm one of the older crowd and sometimes pretty slow to adopt new ideas right off the bat. Having said that, there are a lot of things I heard and/or read about that I still think aren't all that realistic or practicle. But I've gotta tell ya ...after my thru hike this year I learned first hand that there are a lot of great new ideas out there. One such idea is lightening the load by taking advantage of a lighter/smaller backpack and cutting back on unessential stuff. I may be young at heart but this chassis still has 54 years on it and it was very obvious to me that a lighter pack meant less wear and tear. It didn't necessarily mean that I could do more miles in a day than I otherwise would have ...but it sure made the miles I did hike all the more pleasant.

Honestly though ...there are some ideas out there that are ...well, let's just say are OUT THERE !! Maybe they're just a little ahead of their time or something along those lines. But taking advantage of the many advances in gear, clothing and food (at least in my humble opinion) does not make hikers softer ...it makes them smarter !!

[Jester2000]

The current breed of hiker is soft only if you cook him correctly.

[WalkinHome]

It is all about choice - YOUR choices are the only ones that matter.

[rumbler]

I am under the impression - perhaps incorrect - that many of the re-routes over the last three decades have taken the trail away from roads and back over peaks and across rivers, making the trail itself longer and more strenuous.

Screw it. Give me lighter equipment, better food, more hostels - so many of which were a delight to stay at - better information (if nothing else it at least kept me from completely having to refit once I halfway figured out what was going on. Gentler on my wallet at any rate.) and more resupply points.

It's a tough crowd if the average AT thruhiker is considered "soft".

[bunbun]

1. light weight high-tec gear
2. many more hostels
3. blue and yellow blazing becoming prevalent
4. slack packing
5. increased info on the net and in libraries and bookstores
6. switchbacks in difficult areas
7. cell phones: "I just have to talk to a loved one!"
8. more hikers on the AT to lend encouragement and a social atmosphere

Hmmm - Desert Lobster..... uh huh. Any relation to Maine Lobster?

light weight high-tec gear - smart hikers use it - has nothing to do with "soft"

blue and yellow blazing - has always been with us - ask Sloetoe - or WF - or Spiritwalker - or or Exile - or anyone else who hiked "way back when." Fact is that even today more than 95% of thruhikers do some of it.

slack packing - same story -

info - (like the hi-tec gear) doesn't hike the trail for you - you get to do that for yourself (but I may have more to say about that in another thread)

switchbacks - try the PCT --- infinite switchbacks - and yet most AT thruhikers think it's tougher than the AT. They're right.

cell phones - don't mean one is "soft" - just not bright enough to understand how negatively they'll change the hike. Those who NEED "to talk to a loved one" are far more likely to go home to that loved one and not finish the Trail.

more hikers on the AT - is the greatest impediment to my ever hiking the AT again. Even the PCT is too crowded. I think I'll go back to the CDT - or maybe Australia or Alaska. I'm procrastinating here - cause I agree with this one - without their "Trail family" some hikers wouldn't make it to Katahdin.

percentages - a greater "number" of hikers finish because a greater number start and the percentage of finishers has changed only a little over the years.

And finally - the Trail has gotten tougher over the years - not easier - at the same time the finishing percentage has risen slightly and the "numbers" have increased. That doesn't equate to "softer"

Yeah - some of today's hikers are "soft" - but that's always been true. You just don't hear about the "soft" ones 50 years ago - or even 10 years ago. But some of us knew them. So -- tell me something I don't know ...................

[Sleepy the Arab]

1. light weight high-tec gear
2. many more hostels
3. blue and yellow blazing becoming prevalent
4. slack packing
5. increased info on the net and in libraries and bookstores
6. switchbacks in difficult areas
7. cell phones: "I just have to talk to a loved one!"
8. more hikers on the AT to lend encouragement and a social atmosphere

Hey, I've got an opinion on this! I'll tackle each subject in no particular order.

#2. More Hostels. True there are more hostels for todays hiker to take advantage of. On the other hand, back thirty yeas ago, a "through-hiker" was welcomed into more folks homes as they traveled north. Anyone practicing this these days, would soon find themselves overrun with stinky hikers. It's more practical to open a hostel, or just ignore us.

#5 Net usage. I don't quite understand the fascination with staying wired. Personally, I have a no internet policy when I thru-hike. This definitely contributes to the softening of hikers. Time to cut the cord guys!

#7 Cell Phones. Nothing screams "pantywaist" more to me than a hiker with a cell phone. Next subject.

#1. Lightweight high tech gear. Lightweight, shmightweight - todays hikers do carry more high-tech gear, but they also carry more gear - about the same weight as hikers did thirty years ago. While old school gear was heavier, there were many things that they simply did without. Stove? Gone. Sleeping bag? Probably gone. Tent? Substituted a poncho. Water filter? Not even invented. However, the go-lite fad has created a breed of hiker used to conditions even the old school hiker would find spartan. On the other hand, go-lite is only possible thanks to high-tech gear and synthetics. Oh yeah, synthetics - something else they didn't have way back in the good old days when they hiked in cotton T's and jeans...and not by choice, but by necessity.

#3 Blue/Yellow Blazing. Blue blazing ain't new. Yellow blazing I believe to be a newer phenomena created by the increase of people on the trail. After all, what is the motivation for skipping a few hundred if there are no friends up the trail to be with?

#4 Slackpacking. Well, the term is new if the practice isn't. However, with the increase of hostels along the trail, so have the opportunities for slackpacking. It's a bit of a moneymaking scheme that is tough for hikers to pass up.

#6 Switchbacks. Huh? Where?

#8 More hikers etc. Does this really make it easier? I would say only as much as it makes it harder. But either way I would say it is a negligible influence.

I'd like to say that hikers these days are soft but there are other factors to consider. Most of these points are skewed to how things got easier for today's hikers. As one earlier entry pointed out the trail has gotten harder over the last 30-40 years. Some ridiculous percentage of the trail has been rerouted away from tote roads, secondary roads and so on, over crazy-ass peaks that are waaaay out of the way. There are also new concerns over disease (hanta virus, giardia, Lyme disease) that were non-existant ages ago. Not to mention that few people were concerned enough about marauding bears making off with their food to hang it from a tree. Are today's hikers soft? Maybe. Are yesterday's hikers tougher? I wouldn't necessarily say so.

[A-Train]

The Trail this yr was 2172.6 miles. More than any other year. Period. I wonder how many old schoolers had years with this much rain?

[c.coyle]

#3 Blue/Yellow Blazing. Blue blazing ain't new. Yellow blazing I believe to be a newer phenomena created by the increase of people on the trail. After all, what is the motivation for skipping a few hundred if there are no friends up the trail to be with?

What's the difference between yellow blazing and blue blazing?

[jlb2012]

yellow blazing - get rides to bypass sections of trail
blue blazing - hike other trails to bypass sections of trail

[Lone Wolf]

Blue-blazing - taking alternate trails that are sometimes longer, sometimes tougher, but most always more scenic than the AT.

[chomp]

Wait, I think I have heard this argument before. Oh yea, my grandfather used to tell me that he had to walk to school back in his day... uphill... both ways... in the snow...

Does anyone else remember Earl mentioning in 1998 that the trail was much harder today than it was back in 1948? I think that might help offset some of the newer comforts of the trail. The trail itself is longer and harder than it was 50 years ago.

[illininagel]

With all of the couch potatoes sitting around these days, I don't think it makes sense to imply that thru-hikers are soft!

I'm a golfer and always insist on walking and carrying my bag. Typically, playing 18 holes is equivalent to walking 5 miles---or more if I'm not hitting the ball straight! It's usually a very easy and leisurely activity---certainly not aerobic by any stretch of the imagination.

Yet, it's shocking how many people out there wouldn't even consider walking. They insist on riding in the cart and taking any possibility of exercise out of the equation. Now, that's being soft! Let's put this whole thing into perspective.

[Grampie]

I think your logic is all wrong. It still comes down to " hike your own hike."
You don't have to spend a lot of cash on all the latest light weight, high tech stuff. I did my thru with a 1978 Kelty external pack. A lot of other gear was stuff I had. My average pack weight was around 38 lbs. High tech, light weight, I don't think so.
Hostels, like towns along the way, are there. Knowone makes you go to use them. My average was a stop every five days. Resupply, wash cloths, shower and a couple of off trail meals. Never spent extra days off the trail.
Blue & yellow blazing? The opertunity to skip, or take the easy way has always been there. I think the younger generation, more frequently, tend to take the "easy way." I'm 68.
Slack packing has become popular. I don't blame folks for doing it once and awhile. It can get expensive to have to pay for a shuttle. My theroy was; I started out carrying all this gear, so I might just as well carry it the whole trail.
Increased info? I don't think so. Some of the older books on thru-hiking prep are just as usefull as getting info from the computer. I can't see how any additional information can make you have a sucessfull hike. It still comes down to you walking.
I never saw what I would consider, too many switchbacks. I think some are put in, on new relocations, to take some wear and tear from the trail and make it easier to maintain.
Some people need security while out in the vast unknown. If it helps to cary a cell phone by all means do. It doesn't make your hike any easier. In fact look at all the extra weight. I carried one for a while when I passed through Mass. CT. I live in CT and my wife was able to meet up with me a few times. The phone made it easier to make arrangements.
More hikers? I guess the figures show more and more hikers are on the trail. I guess it depends on what kind of group you want to hang with. I see more younger folks staying together in larger groups. I have been a caretaker at UPper Goose Pond for the last two years. I can look back on my hike and say, other than a few weeks, around Trail Days, I didn't experience what I would conside crowds. In the Whites there were a lot of people, but you have to expect that and I think it has always been like that.
I think it's all relitive. You still have to put the pack on your back, walk all day, walk in rain and sometimes snow, eat crappie meals, get bitten by bugs, get up in the morning and put wet cloths on and be dirty much of the time. If you can take all that, it hasn't changed since thru-hiking started.

[Haiku]

Switchbacks aren't built to make trails easier - they're built to keep trails from eroding. You'll also find more switchbacks on western trails because they tend to be stock trails as well as hiking trails.

Haiku.

[Rain Man]

Wait, I think I have heard this argument before. Oh yea, my grandfather used to tell me that he had to walk to school back in his day... uphill... both ways... in the snow...

That wasn't your grandfather, that was my daddy! And the weather was 95 degrees to boot, even in the deep snow, and somehow his kept getting frostbite, as I recall, while sweating. LOL

All kidding aside .... something readers of history will have heard before is "lightweight backpacking." This was the topic of one of the original PATC/ATC conferences, back in the 1930s or so. Plus, plenty of hikers back then had 20 lb packs.

So, lightweight backpacking might SEEM like the latest thing, but it ain't.

Rain Man
.

[Jack Tarlin]

Chomp raised a good point---

Years ago, hundreds of miles of the A.T were either roadwalks, or involved walking on pavement, dirt roads, lumber tracks, etc. Only in recent years, thanks to the ATC land-acquisition program and other efforts to widen and protect the Trail corridor, have we gotten to the point where something like 99% of the A.T. is now in the woods, hills, or mountains. This did not use to be the case.

There are certainly developments in recent years, such as lightweight gear and the proliferation of trail services, lodging places, etc. that have made certain things easier for hikers. The information explosion, i.e. the greatly increased number of books, guides, and publications aimed at helping thru-hikers, has also helped make things easier, and of course, the Internet makes it much easier for hikers to exchange information with others, to ask questions, and to learn from other folks. People are undoubtedly heading out on the Trail these days MUCH better informed, and much more knowledgable about the Trail and what they're likely to encounter than in previous years.

However, the "completion" rate for folks attempting to hike the whole Trail have stayed pretty much the same for many years (if we overlook the hundreds of false claims each year which obviously skew the "completion" figures). Roughly the same percentage of folks complete a thru-hike as they did years ago, which leads one to think that new hostels, restaurants, outfitters, gadgets, books, and so on may help people out, especially in the eary days of one's hike, but ultimately, it's NOT this stuff that will get them to Maine (or Georgia). They've got to get themselves there, and in that the physical trail has gotten tougher than it originally was, I wouldn't say today's thru-hikers are "soft." Do they have some things a lot easier than folks who hiked in the sixties or seventies? Absolutely. But to say they've gone soft is neither fair nor accurate. I've met hundreds of thru-hikers over the years, and I can't think of more than a handful who could honestly say at the end of their trip that it was easy. "Soft" hikers don't make it, and that's one thing that will never change.

[warren doyle]

As one who was there, and has been there since (i.e.,1972-present), except for the trail being about 120 miles longer than it was in the early 70's and for western Maine, eastern NY, and northern Virginia, the trail is EASIER (in terms of physical stress on the body) than it was then due to extensive switchbacks in the south, better trail maintenance overall, and remarkable trail work (i.e. footway) in New England.
Yes, there are more hiker services as well which have had a tendency to extend the average duration of a thru-hike from the 90's to the present, beyond the expected days added by the additional 120 miles.
Also, the amount of road walking (i.e. passable by passenger vehicle) was actually much less than posted on previous entries by people who weren't even there.
And as I have mentioned before, the percentage of blue-blazers among thru-hikers was much lower before the AT land acquisition program kicked into gear in the late 70's and before the publication of Maret's Philosopher's Guide.
I met and talked to Earl S. several times during his last hike, the 'difficulty' of the southern trail which he expressed his frustration about was, in my opinion, a factor of his age rather than the trail itself.
One will change more through the years than the trail itself and I have, and will, accept that reality without frustration and complaint.
Also, I will have to respectfully disagree with Lone Wolf's interpretation of blue-blazing because his entry gives the impression that blue-blazers pick the longest, more difficult, and more scenic alternative.
In my opinion, and based on actual observation, the popular blue-blaze routes a) Laurel Gorge/Rt. 321; b) Virginia Creeper Trail; c) Old AT north of Mt. Rogers; d) Mau-Har Trail; e) trails skipping the northern Presidentials - these are shorter and with less elevation changes (i.e., easier) than the Appalachian Trail. And one could also question whether the blue-blaze alternative in the five areas mentioned above are more scenic than the AT (but 'scenic' and 'softer' are subjective terms and open to much interpretation).
However, a mile is a mile - not a half-mile; a mountain climb is an ascent/descent - not a road walk or a railroad grade; and, a white blaze is a white blaze - not a blue blaze (unless one pleads 'color blindness').