WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 116
  1. #81
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-16-2015
    Location
    Chaumont,Ny
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    Hardbacks with pretty covers. Perfect condition would probably fetch some coinage.


    Wow I don't know ! About the same price as a Cubanfiber tarp ! :0)

  2. #82
    Registered User soilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-29-2010
    Location
    Chillicothe, OH
    Age
    69
    Posts
    600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    Hardbacks with pretty covers. Perfect condition would probably fetch some coinage.
    In reality the covers are plain white. The dust jackets are illustrated. I have a first edition, third printing that I purchased probably around 1980 that I started rereading this winter. Unfortunately the one dust jacket is long gone and the other is falling apart.
    More walking, less talking.

  3. #83
    Clueless Weekender
    Join Date
    04-10-2011
    Location
    Niskayuna, New York
    Age
    68
    Posts
    3,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Tarlin View Post
    It should be remembered that most hikers go thru two to two and a half pounds of food per day.

    It should further be remembered that in addition to trying to go too fast too early in the journey, the single biggest thing that knocks people off the Trail early on is carrying too much stuff and refusing to do anything about their excessive pack weight.

    A fifteen day food bag, for most people, would weigh thirty pounds and probably more. For most folks, this would be something neither comfortable or advisable.
    You're a many-times thru-hiker, and I'm a clueless weekender, and on this we agree! Thanks for injecting a word of sanity.

    I like to think that I'd carry only a little too much and go only a little too fast, but maybe I flatter myself. I might someday discover that the challenges of a thru-hike are of an entirely different order than I've seen in half a century or so of weekend backpacks and the occasional hiking vacation. I'm unlikely ever to learn.
    I always know where I am. I'm right here.

  4. #84
    ME => GA 19AT3 rickb's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-2002
    Location
    Marlboro, MA
    Posts
    7,145
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    1

    Default

    The bulk of 15 days worth of food would also be an issue-- but I think this is an example of getting the right answer to the wrong question.

    Rather than ponder whether or not 15 days of food makes sence on the AT, better to ask when 6 days worth of food might play better than 4. Even if a resupply is available at day 4.

    Or if a seven plus day haul might suit you best-- rather than breaking it up into two "weekends" length hikes.

    And so forth.

  5. #85
    Registered User dzierzak's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-10-2007
    Location
    Huntington, WV
    Age
    75
    Posts
    309
    Images
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mags View Post
    Classics for sure. But I paid $30 for mine ten years ago. Are they worth 10 times as much ten years later? Dunno...
    Not likely worth that much. IIRC that offering has been up for several years. You can certainly find it for less most of the time. Just wait a bit and it'll come around again - cheaper...

  6. #86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Tarlin View Post
    It should be remembered that most hikers go thru two to two and a half pounds of food per day.

    It should further be remembered that in addition to trying to go too fast too early in the journey, the single biggest thing that knocks people off the Trail early on is carrying too much stuff and refusing to do anything about their excessive pack weight.

    A fifteen day food bag, for most people, would weigh thirty pounds and probably more. For most folks, this would be something neither comfortable or advisable.
    I agree with you that most thruhikers would never finish their AT hike if they had to lug too much weight whether it's gear weight or food weight. The unique feature of the AT allows backpackers constant resupply opportunities with town visits and money exchanges---or post office pickups. And isn't the main point of a thruhiker to finish and get to Maine?

    Despite the usual hikers, there are a handful like Eric Ryback who go out with large food loads and say---"I knew I could go into the woods and stay for as long as the food lasted before coming back to civilization again." And he finished the hike.

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb View Post
    The bulk of 15 days worth of food would also be an issue-- but I think this is an example of getting the right answer to the wrong question.

    Rather than ponder whether or not 15 days of food makes sence on the AT, better to ask when 6 days worth of food might play better than 4. Even if a resupply is available at day 4.

    Or if a seven plus day haul might suit you best-- rather than breaking it up into two "weekends" length hikes.

    And so forth.
    You bring up the point of the possible modern trend of too-frequent resupplies---carrying minimal food and therefore minimal weight with 4 day resupplies. It may have something to do with either the quest for the lightest pack at all costs, or the need to stay hooked into towns and society more and the woods less.

  7. #87
    Registered User
    Join Date
    01-16-2011
    Location
    On the trail
    Posts
    3,789
    Images
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    I agree with you that most thruhikers would never finish their AT hike if they had to lug too much weight whether it's gear weight or food weight. The unique feature of the AT allows backpackers constant resupply opportunities with town visits and money exchanges---or post office pickups. And isn't the main point of a thruhiker to finish and get to Maine?

    Despite the usual hikers, there are a handful like Eric Ryback who go out with large food loads and say---"I knew I could go into the woods and stay for as long as the food lasted before coming back to civilization again." And he finished the hike.



    You bring up the point of the possible modern trend of too-frequent resupplies---carrying minimal food and therefore minimal weight with 4 day resupplies. It may have something to do with either the quest for the lightest pack at all costs, or the need to stay hooked into towns and society more and the woods less.
    Tipi, while I love to read about your off the grid freezer box expeditions, you are completely inconsistent with your post about theuhiking. Yes, I agree with the first bolded statement. Regardless of what people say, a thru hikers objective is to finish the hike. Everything else is rationalization. So, with that as an objective, your value statement is inconsistent with that goal. Too frequent resupplies? Too frequent for who? Obviously not for most who thru hike which is what this entire thread is directed toward. the only way you could say that a "thru hiker" had too frequent resupplies or town stops is if it impact their ability to reach their objective. that does happen, people spend too much time or money and it impacts their stated goal of completing the trail.

    i m sure there are people saying, it's the journey not the destination so whether you finish doesn't matter, great, then don't call yourself a thruhiker when you are in GA.

  8. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post

    i m sure there are people saying, it's the journey not the destination so whether you finish doesn't matter, great, then don't call yourself a thruhiker when you are in GA.
    I think a thru-hike is about the journey AND the destination...it's not one or the other. You can't be called a thru-hiker without going all the way from GA to MA (or vice versa), but if it was only about the destination and not the journey then why not just drive it!

    Anyway, just my 2c worth

  9. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    So, with that as an objective, your value statement is inconsistent with that goal. Too frequent resupplies? Too frequent for who? Obviously not for most who thru hike which is what this entire thread is directed toward. the only way you could say that a "thru hiker" had too frequent resupplies or town stops is if it impact their ability to reach their objective. that does happen, people spend too much time or money and it impacts their stated goal of completing the trail.
    I wrote in regards to Rickb's comment about carrying 4 days of food versus 6 days of food. He wrote---

    Rather than ponder whether or not 15 days of food makes sence on the AT, better to ask when 6 days worth of food might play better than 4. Even if a resupply is available at day 4.

    Or if a seven plus day haul might suit you best-- rather than breaking it up into two "weekends" length hikes.

    You'd have to ask Rickb how 6 days worth of food instead of 4 "might play better."

    Plus, as you say, too many town trips could impede the hike and end the goal.

    Or too frequent town trips could drain finances.

    Most thruhikers who start don't finish---which may or may not be relevant to resupply cycles or amount of food carried. And it would interesting to see of those who are successful what was their average food load and/or pack weight. How often did they resupply? Four days? Six days? Ten days?

    Beyond all this, I believe there is more of a trend nowadays for thruhikers to carry less food weight overall.

    Nick Gatel is a regular contributor to the forums at BackpackingLight.com and there was a discussion on Ultralight Ideas and trends and he wrote this neato blurb---

    "What I think has really changed is most people are unwilling to backpack for 10-14 days without a resupply. They don't mind leaving the wilderness to go into trail towns and get food."

    He's not talking about the AT but about the general mindset of UL backpackers. I think this mindset bleeds into AT backpackers too. See the BPL thread here---

    https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/99143/

  10. #90

    Default

    Thank You for all the help and information you put forth for the hiking community.

  11. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post
    You bring up the point of the possible modern trend of too-frequent resupplies---carrying minimal food and therefore minimal weight with 4 day resupplies. It may have something to do with either the quest for the lightest pack at all costs, or the need to stay hooked into towns and society more and the woods less.
    This is the reason I go into every excursion with an "enjoyment of the outdoors" mentality rather than a destination mentality. The great thing about the AT is that it's easy to change up your game just about anywhere outside the 100-mile wilderness. Adapt as you go.. and quit worrying about what everyone else is doing. Sit down by a fire at home and think of what YOU want to do.. then DO IT.

  12. #92
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2005
    Location
    Bedford, MA
    Posts
    12,678

    Default

    [re: Tipi's list of "mistakes"]

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    mistake or maybe they have different goals than you?
    Bingo.

  13. #93

    Default

    [re: Tipi's list of "mistakes"]

    Originally Posted by Malto
    mistake or maybe they have different goals than you?
    "Bingo."



    I still consider "holding court" by thruhikers at shelters to be not so much a goal as a mistake. Then again, maybe it is a goal.

  14. #94
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2005
    Location
    Bedford, MA
    Posts
    12,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rocketsocks View Post
    another option once used quite a bit is the cache method, hardly ever employed anymore.
    I recall reading about this method in a few of the old journals (from that venerable two-volume set mentioned in this thread.) But I doubt it was used by more than a few hikers, and I could see all sorts of logistical problems if lots of people tried using it. For one thing, it means pre-visiting each cache location and then remembering each location, exactly, months later. Kind of crazy for the AT. But might be useful or even necessary on a less-frequented, more remote trail like the Cohos Trail.

  15. #95
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2005
    Location
    Bedford, MA
    Posts
    12,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post

    I still consider "holding court" by thruhikers at shelters to be not so much a goal as a mistake. Then again, maybe it is a goal.
    Not sure how that's relevant to the thread, Tipi. I know where you're coming from and I understand your antipathy toward the very notion of thru-hiking. I agree with the advice that Clarity offers in her article, and am convinced that traveling light is a huge plus if one's goal is to walk the length of the AT in typical fashion (ie., end-to-end, in four to six months or so.)

    The "holding court at shelters" part is neither here nor there. It happens a lot in the first few days or weeks, but by the time hikers make it to VA, they have better things to talk about.

  16. #96

    Default

    One goal of mine for getting my packweight lighter has always been to carry more food. When I start my 2016 thru. I'll have 8lbs of food for a total packweight of just under 20lbs, with half a liter of water. Personally, I've found that the lighter my pack is, the better I enjoy hiking. I carried massive gear weights when I was deployed overseas, 90lbs of armor, weapons, medical gear, ect, and I paid for it. Not that that much weight was a choice, all the gear was needed. I don't need to carry that much for backpacking, and I would hate it like hell if I had to.

    On my 2010 thru, my pack maxed out at 28lbs with food, ect, aside from carrying 18lbs thru the smokies, which I ate all of it in 6 days, but I started March 5th, and had snow all the way until the end of the smokies.

    Once I have my trail legs again, I'll start stretching my food supply out, I'd like to eventually be able to carry 16lbs of food, and still have a lightweight pack. Though I will see how it goes, and may just stick with 10lbs or so. I don't mind towns, but I'd rather be out hiking, and resupply at towns near the trail. I mostly did a lot of nearos for resupply on my last thru, and plan on sticking with that this time as well.

    I hike fast because I walk fast, not to be in a rush. I still take plenty of breaks and enjoying the view. I hike all day because I love hiking, not to do miles.

    I'll be carrying a lot of water on my PCT thru next year as well, so another reason to go lighter. I've found from personal experience that hiking with a pack heavier than about 35lbs total really sucks. I don't even want it over 25lbs total, honestly. Everyone is different, though.

    But I know what it's like to walk around with 90lbs all the time, and it truly sucks. That was a massive motivator for me when I first started hiking, before I even knew about ultralight or anything else. I don't "preach" to people about ultralight, and only say something if they look like they are struggling with a monster pack, and not enjoying themselves. Some people truly don't know any better and think backpacking is supposed to have 50 lbs on your back. I did a short hike when I fist started backpacking, and my pack was 40lbs or so. It sucked bad. I felt like crap, was wore out from it, had to take too many breaks, and barely made any miles. It wasn't fun at all.

    I'll be starting late this year, have some stuff from college I have to finish up, and student loan things, and a few other random items. I plan on starting on April 15th or so.

  17. #97

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,866
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tipi Walter View Post

    Nick Gatel is a regular contributor to the forums at BackpackingLight.com and there was a discussion on Ultralight Ideas and trends and he wrote this neato blurb---

    "What I think has really changed is most people are unwilling to backpack for 10-14 days without a resupply. They don't mind leaving the wilderness to go into trail towns and get food."

    He's not talking about the AT but about the general mindset of UL backpackers. I think this mindset bleeds into AT backpackers too. See the BPL thread here---

    https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/99143/
    The salient point. Is that many lightweight hikers are covering the same distance in half the time, with half the food, than heavier hikers historically did.

    That said, the subset of really UL hikers is actually very small. I read a survey by John Ladd of 700 jmt hikers a couple years ago...I think there was only a couple lighter than me when I did it, and I wasnt particularly light by my own frame of reference.

    I amazed at people that couldnt complete 110 mile stretch without resupply by packer , and cited lack of food as problem as well.

    On AT, Ive seen very, very few UL hikers as well. Mant people are carrying too much crap, and only have room for a couple days food.
    Last edited by MuddyWaters; 03-12-2016 at 08:13.

  18. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2005
    Location
    Bedford, MA
    Posts
    12,678

    Default

    Let's recall that the OP's article was intended for newbie thru-hikers just starting out at Springer or Amicalola. Even if one were to hike the approach trail, it's only 40 miles to Neels from there. Anyone hoping to make it to Maine should be able to walk that distance in four days. No need at all to carry a lot of food in that section.

    There's no doubt in my mind that cell phones and support infrastructure (hostels and willing shuttlers) have changed the nature of an AT thru hike so that it really is nothing more than a series of three and four day section hikes.

    Time was when you had to carry a week's worth of food to get from Monson to Abol Bridge, but even that is old-hat, and for the same reason.

  19. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cain View Post
    Great write up! My fiancée and I will be starting from the approach trail on March 26th, Can not wait!
    Awesome!
    I'll be at the visitors center to register you!
    ~Clarity
    Great blog site for new and/or female hikers! www.appalachiantrailclarity.com

  20. #100
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10-08-2015
    Location
    Chester, NJ
    Age
    67
    Posts
    36

    Default

    All great comments.

    The amount of information available here and on other forums is incredible. At the end of the day, some people will heed the advice offered (the ability to learn from others) and some will not. For those that do not, you hope they have a shake down hike to learn the mistakes themselves :-)

    In reality, thru hikes have been completed by those who have been very well prepared with top of the line equipment and also by those who (it seems like) wandered onto the trail (gee, I wonder where this goes). I believe this speaks to being comfortable with the prep work you've done and your mental attitude and philosophical approach to the hike.

    Safe travels to all

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •