Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

It's Only a Matter of Time, Or is it?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • rafe wrote:

      max.patch wrote:

      thru hiking is not a timed event at all.
      How do you figure? At the outside, in one calendar year (or some such.) In reality, for most folks, something like five or six months.
      LASHing, on the other hand, is free-form.
      the fact that a thru takes 6 months plus or minus does not make it a timed event. a thru hike is like a baseball game; it's done when it's done. no clock ticking away the time.
      2,000 miler

    • I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?

      I'm aware that the certificate from ATC doesn't say thru-hiker or section hiker, it says something about 2000 miles. When ATC talks about thru-hiking, it is to describe the logistics of a typical 5 or 6 month thru-hike -- direction is irrelevant, but generally understood as "in one go."

    • rafe wrote:

      I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?

      I'm aware that the certificate from ATC doesn't say thru-hiker or section hiker, it says something about 2000 miles. When ATC talks about thru-hiking, it is to describe the logistics of a typical 5 or 6 month thru-hike -- direction is irrelevant, but generally understood as "in one go."
      I would not say it is a timed event, but I see the points you are trying to make here in that is impacted by time or the calendar. The time of year impacts the amount of day light, weather, etc..
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • Astro wrote:

      nt of da

      Astro wrote:

      rafe wrote:

      I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?

      I'm aware that the certificate from ATC doesn't say thru-hiker or section hiker, it says something about 2000 miles. When ATC talks about thru-hiking, it is to describe the logistics of a typical 5 or 6 month thru-hike -- direction is irrelevant, but generally understood as "in one go."
      I would not say it is a timed event, but I see the points you are trying to make here in that is impacted by time or the calendar. The time of year impacts the amount of day light, weather, etc..
      Every thru hiker deals with this, one way or another. The young and super-fit and ex-Marines can shrug it off. But there is the one requirement of doing the entire length of the trail, in one big push. Anything of longer duration is a section hike, not a thru hike.

      I am in no way passing judgement on thru hiking vs. section hiking. If not "timed", thru hikes are certainly constrained in time.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by rafe ().

    • rafe wrote:

      I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?
      i'm not going to get involved in one of these discussions, but i'll answer your question since you specifically asked me.

      do i disagree? yes. and the reason is "one calendar year" should have nothing to do with the definition as i will point out in this reply.

      i will preface my comment by stating that the atc, as "caretaker" of the trail, certainly has the right to define a thru hike and a 2,000 miler. i am giving my personal opinion.

      the traditional definition of a thru hike is starting at one terminus and hiking pretty much continuously to the other terminus. that definition had no calendar year requirement. there was no reason to change the traditional definiton and that remains my personal definition of the term.

      here's a few examples of why the inclusion of a "calendar year" is flawed.

      • even as we speak, hikers who started at katahdin are finishing up now. not thru-hikers since they started in 2015 and finished in 2016?
      • how about the guy who loves cold weather hiking. started at springer 1/1 and hiked 3 months to harpers ferry. went home for 6 months during the heat of the summer, returned to katahdin 10/1 and hiked sobo to harpers ferry finishing 12/31? is it still a thru hike when you take a 6 month break or 2 section hikes? answer is clear to me.
      • ya ever see the tv series about the people that weigh 600 pounds and their struggle to lose weight? lets say one of those people decides to thru hike the trail to regain his health. lets say they can hike 4 miles a day (and if you've ever seen that show 4 miles would be a heckuva accomplishment). if he started at springer 1/1 and hiked 4 miles a day, every day with no days off, on december 31 he would be just over the border in conneticut. he continues on at his 4 miles a day pace and summits katahdin in early july. 18 month hike. i'm calling that guy a thru hiker. i don't care what the atc says.
      so if "calendar year" is meaningless -- hike 6 miles a day and ya can get it done -- why did the atc add the calendar year stipulation? you can blame the internet troublemakers for that. internet troublemakers would focus on the word "continuously" and piously intone that if you "spent one nite in town you were not a thru hiker." this, of course, led to discussions such as "if i take 3 days off and fly home to my sons wedding am i still a thru hiker"? and "i had a stress fracture and had to go home for 2 weeks to recuperate am i still a thru hiker"?

      and while the internet troublemakers succeeded in stirring up the forums, they created a real world problem. well meaning people would actually call and write the atc and ask those same questions as they honestly did not want to void their status as thru hikers. the atc did not want to be put in the position of telling one person that their 4 days off was ok and tell the next that their 5 days off was not. so they added the calendar year caveat (note-without looking i do not recall if the atc said "calendar year" or just "year". i have used calendar year in my response as that is what you referrred to).

      the phrase "pretty much continuously" is like "porn" -- hard to quantify in words but i know it when i see it.
      2,000 miler

    • SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?

      I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?
      I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      2,000 miler

    • max.patch wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      too much of a chance of stepping on a copperhead for me.
      "Dazed and Confused"
      Recycle, re-use, re-purpose
      Plant a tree
      Take a kid hiking
      Make a difference

    • I'm with Max on thruhiking versus section hiking. To me a thruhike is fairly continuous, i.e. no breaks long enough to lose "condition". Having said that I would never tell someone who took 3 months off and said they thruhiked it that they were a section hiker. It's my definition, not theirs.
      On night hiking, I don't like it much. I agree it slows you down. It can also be unnerving, lots of extra creature activity at night. It's reasonably popular here, particularly at this time of year, as a way to beat the heat. I prefer to avoid long hikes in hot weather. Erroneously many people believe it is a way of avoiding snakes. Quite the opposite, snakes are very active on warm nights. I am always very cautious on night time nature breaks here in warm weather.
      Resident Australian, proving being a grumpy old man is not just an American trait.

    • max.patch wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      I stumble and fall equally well in both.
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.

    • max.patch wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      Are you by chance an industrial engineer?
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.

    • Drybones wrote:

      max.patch wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      Are you by chance an industrial engineer?
      cpa; my opinion is anecdotal based on personal experience and not from a textbook. although i'm sure an engineer would agree. :)
      2,000 miler

    • I never got into night hiking much. I can see where it might work where the path is fairly level, easy to follow, and free of obstructions.

      A couple summers ago I ran out of daylight coming down off Camels Hump on the Long Trail. The trail was so gnarly I was probably moving at 1/4 mile per hour by headlamp. It was impossible. After about fifteen minutes of that, I found a place to pitch the tent and called it a night. In the morning I discovered I had made camp maybe 1/4 or 1/2 mile above the shelter I was headed for.

    • rafe wrote:

      I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?

      I'm aware that the certificate from ATC doesn't say thru-hiker or section hiker, it says something about 2000 miles. When ATC talks about thru-hiking, it is to describe the logistics of a typical 5 or 6 month thru-hike -- direction is irrelevant, but generally understood as "in one go."
      OK, I'm gonna nit pick. If a thru hike has to happen in one calendar year does that mean The Real Hiking Viking's SOBO hike isn't gonna count because he started in December of 2015 and will finish, if he finishes, in 2016?

    • LIhikers wrote:

      rafe wrote:

      I don't think I'm picking nits here. Nobody is standing by with a stopwatch, that's true. But it must be done in one calendar year, so it is a timed event in that sense. If it takes more than a year, it's not really a thru hike at that point. Do you disagree?

      I'm aware that the certificate from ATC doesn't say thru-hiker or section hiker, it says something about 2000 miles. When ATC talks about thru-hiking, it is to describe the logistics of a typical 5 or 6 month thru-hike -- direction is irrelevant, but generally understood as "in one go."
      OK, I'm gonna nit pick. If a thru hike has to happen in one calendar year does that mean The Real Hiking Viking's SOBO hike isn't gonna count because he started in December of 2015 and will finish, if he finishes, in 2016?
      Of course not, that's a common scenario for SOBO hikes, they often end in January or February of the following year. But SOBO hikes are the minority, by far. Why dwell on the exceptional cases while ignoring the most common case?

    • I have to say I love night hikes for week end trips, and even hikes during down pours, something different. On a long hike I'd hike at night when the days are hot or I have a lot of distance to cover. Short story: I left Cornelius Shelter about two hours before daylight because I had a very long day ahead of me. It was so foggy you could hardly see the trail in front of you and water was falling off the tree like a heavy rain. I had gone about 30 minutes when I realized I had dropped my cap when I took my pack off about 20 minutes back, debated on going back to find it because I doubted I could see a black cap with the visibility but knew I needed the cap, hiked until I knew I had gone far enough and gave up, found the cap cap on the way back, took a wrong trail down the mountain (of course) and discovered after about 30 minutes I was not on the AT, went back up the Mt. and onto the AT and was really trying to make up the lost time when I saw a sign that said "Cornelius Shelter 1/2 mile (or something like that)...I am soooooo proud of myself, I didn't get pissed at all, I just turned around and hiked that section for the fourth time in the dark and still made it to where I needed to that day.
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.

    • max.patch wrote:

      Astro wrote:

      SarcasmTheElf wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      Da Wolf wrote:

      for most thru-hikers it is
      I suppose you're right.....get to the next camp spot before dark.
      That's because most of the fools never figure out how wonderful night hiking is. ;)
      What is so wonderful about night hiking?I usually only do it when I am trying to get a head start in the morning or it ends up taking me longer than expected in the evening.
      night hiking is inefficient; your mph is reduced making it a poor use of time.
      I hike essentially the same speed. I'm often starting hikes in the dark after driving to the trailhead.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123

    • I've night hiked in the Rainforests of Costa Rica. Trust me, the snakes are out at night! Never saw their eyes glow, but the spiders.... Millions of glowing spider eyes were staring back at me.

      Oh, and if you are into glowing eyes... check out the gators in the Everglades at night. Yikes!
      “Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
      the saddest are these, 'It might have been.”

      John Greenleaf Whittier

    • IMScotty wrote:

      I've night hiked in the Rainforests of Costa Rica. Trust me, the snakes are out at night! Never saw their eyes glow, but the spiders.... Millions of glowing spider eyes were staring back at me.

      Oh, and if you are into glowing eyes... check out the gators in the Everglades at night. Yikes!
      What's good to see in Florida? Ignoring all the Disney and theme-park crap.

    • rafe wrote:

      IMScotty wrote:

      I've night hiked in the Rainforests of Costa Rica. Trust me, the snakes are out at night! Never saw their eyes glow, but the spiders.... Millions of glowing spider eyes were staring back at me.

      Oh, and if you are into glowing eyes... check out the gators in the Everglades at night. Yikes!
      What's good to see in Florida? Ignoring all the Disney and theme-park crap.
      St Agustine: Oldest city in US & old fort.
      Kennedy Space Center
      Blue Spring State Park: Go when it's cold. The mantatees flock to the warm springs there.

    • Mountain-Mike wrote:

      rafe wrote:

      IMScotty wrote:

      I've night hiked in the Rainforests of Costa Rica. Trust me, the snakes are out at night! Never saw their eyes glow, but the spiders.... Millions of glowing spider eyes were staring back at me.

      Oh, and if you are into glowing eyes... check out the gators in the Everglades at night. Yikes!
      What's good to see in Florida? Ignoring all the Disney and theme-park crap.
      St Agustine: Oldest city in US & old fort.Kennedy Space Center
      Blue Spring State Park: Go when it's cold. The mantatees flock to the warm springs there.
      Cool, St. Augustine was already on the list. I forgot about Cape Canaveral... Saw a few manatees last year at Homosassa Springs State Park.