"Chunk Hiker" just doesn't roll off the tongue. I think you should call yourself a "Chunky Hiker." Easier to say! LOLOriginally Posted by handlebar
RainMan
.
[I]ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: ... Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit....[/I]. Numbers 35
[url]www.MeetUp.com/NashvilleBackpacker[/url]
.
Winged monkey,great question and more importantly good point!Call it what it is,section, day ,thru-hike or whatever other conitation one wants to put on it.Me sometimes I'm a weekend hiker which always makes me a day hiker.And sometimes I'm just a hiker.
You are right that chunk hiker doesn't roll of the tongue but Chunky hiker has some kinda tone of being chunky and bulky."Chunk Hiker" just doesn't roll off the tongue. I think you should call yourself a "Chunky Hiker." Easier to say! LOL
Rain
.
How about Chunker= chunk+ hiker ?
I like this thread. Op has a clear point. Yes I know the terms do not make the hikes diffrent but when we talk herein WB it makes a difference.
It seems to me that they orriginaly defined the word Section hiker with another intention but today we use it for both section hikers who have or dont have intention to finish the trail in the future.
so it is like that we practically have two separate group that use the same title. does it matter? for me it does. nowadays we leave in trails less than the time that we spend online so words and definitions should be as clear as possible.
For example you meet a hiker on AT and ask her about her trip and she says" I am a section hiker" is her answer enough for you to think hat " Ok she is going to finish AT someday in the future." while she just meant she is hiking a section. so you need to ask the second and third question about her while if we start to define words and make them as clear as possible it will make our future conversation easier. Like if she says " I am a sectionist for exmple and sectionist by definition is a hiker who hikes sections with intention to finish it while section hiker is hiking the trail just in sections .( that was just an example and dos not mean I am offering new term, so please....).
Don't you think here in WB is the plac to disscuss these new needs of terms?
Thank you OP.
I have a world of respect for section hikers either. I take my hat off for them but you said Thru is easy.Really?leave her alone
it sound like your first post Windmonkey was "i know what i am, but what are you?' what's the difference if you set out as a weekend hiker. get 500 miles under your belt and you think with some planning you could do the whole trail, but you didn't call yourself a section hiker?............do you need to start over.
Thru is easy... sectioning takes more planning , persistence and money. i have MUCH more respect for them.
Have you done a thru ?
Have you done section hiking to compare these two?
I just think people who have done both are eligible for a comparison making but even then they are not going to say thru is easy, you know why? it simply is not easy.
Who in the h*** told you that?
Sounds like a good portrayal pertaining to a lot of us."Chunk Hiker" just doesn't roll off the tongue. I think you should call yourself a "Chunky Hiker." Easier to say! LOL
Rain
.
But not Handlebar, having thru'd the AT & PCT plus his "chunks" of the CDT. And then there's his thruhike of the Allegheny Trail totally in wintery conditions replete with deep snow, freezing rain, hard-to-locate trail, numerous blowdowns - and no Trail Angels dispensing Trail Magic around.
Another lady hiker I met in the parking lot at Springer, it's ok though because I probably should be in the Chunker hiker category anywayWho in the h*** told you that?
Last edited by Northern Lights; 11-08-2011 at 00:03.
The real question as to which is easier is what is the % of hikers who set out to complete it in section or set out to complete a thru end up finishing the whole thing.
I imagine it isn't purely black and white as there are hikers who intended a thru but had to come off the trail in their thru year and finished in sections and there are people who just start hiking a lot, get a few hundred miles in, and decide to finish in chunks.
Who cares what you call it--go out and enjoy the trail!
Isn't everyone a section hiker until they actually take that last step...
Right now we are all sitting on our butts, thinking about hiking hikers.
The proposition that you're not a section hiker unless you have or intend to piece together all the "SECTIONS" of the AT is so ludicrous it makes me want to ralph in my mouth!
I've been hiking sections of the AT, PCT, Long Trail, Foothills Trail, and many other trails for 39 years and I'll call myself a section hiker because I go out and do sections of trails, a section being from one road access point to another. Try to take my badges! I don't have any. But you can take my toilet paper . . . cause that's about all the proposition is worth!
An AT section hike is any hike >0 and <2,181. Does not matter is the hiker intends to hike the entire trail or not.
You are a backpacker by god!
L Dog
AT 2000 Miler
The Laughing Dog Blog
https://lighterpack.com/r/38fgjt
"The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness." - John Muir
Whew! The name is longer than the trail!
L Dog
AT 2000 Miler
The Laughing Dog Blog
https://lighterpack.com/r/38fgjt
"The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness." - John Muir
Now *that's* funny!
L Dog
AT 2000 Miler
The Laughing Dog Blog
https://lighterpack.com/r/38fgjt
"The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness." - John Muir
What do we do with someone who's section hiked (complete) the triple crown?
Summit
Section Hiker, PhD (Piled High & Deep)
Anyone who expects to be acknowledged and distinguished by others for their accomplishments has a serious ego-pride problem. Having joy in your own accomplishments should be enough.
Yours truly,
One who loves to walk
Congratulate them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
