2010 Appalachian Trail Circle Expedition

[Mags]

J

Unlike most other A.T. hikers in 1980, I had the opportunity to hike with The UConn Expedition twice.

I the "small world" category, I am friend's with one of the members from that year.

On the night this picture was taken, he entertained some of us with the stories of the Uconn's CDT expedtion shortly thereafter. The CDT was a bit different in the mid 80s to say the least. When I was in Lincoln,MT and looked over the nearly 30 yr old PO register, sure enough..they had signed in there, too. Good stuff.

[warren doyle]

The first group to walk the entire AT was the 1975 UC0NN Appalachian Trail Circle Expedition (19 people - 100% completion rate; 110 days). Mike Hinckley was a member of the 1980 UCONN Appalachian Trail Circle Expedition (14 people - 100% completion rate; 109 days).

Most of the members of the first group to do the PCT in 1977 were members of the 1975 AT Expedition.

Most of the members of the first group to do the CDT in 1984 were members of the 1975 and 1980 AT Circle Expeditions.

The PCT and CDT expeditions were under the capable leadership of Kirk Sinclair 'Diggerfoot' , one of the early Triple Crowners.

Kirk is organizing a van-supported PCT group hike in 2010.

[Jim Adams]

10 days of backpacking and a continuous 117 days of "day hiking" is not a thru hike. You simply traveled the miles and IMO missed the whole reason to be out there in the first place. It may be a different experience but one with quite abit of missed trip experiences.
The reason 80% fail on thru hikes is because it IS far more difficult to complete while carrying a full pack.

geek

[dixicritter]

Let's all remeber to HYOH ok?

[Chache]

10 days of backpacking and a continuous 117 days of "day hiking" is not a thru hike. You simply traveled the miles and IMO missed the whole reason to be out there in the first place. It may be a different experience but one with quite abit of missed trip experiences.
The reason 80% fail on thru hikes is because it IS far more difficult to complete while carrying a full pack.

geek

Here we go again

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

The ATC does not specify that a pack must be carried to attain thru-hiker status - only that the entire AT must be hiked in a single season - so WD's successful participants are indeed thru-hikers by the ATC definition.

WD has noted that the experience is different from the non-assisted thru-hikes attempted by others. Some of the requirements for a non-supported hike (carrying everything one needs pretty much the entire length of the trail, planning one's own meals and sleeping arrangements, etc.) are absent while some of the requirements for WD's hike (the group dynamic, the number of miles hiked, the rigid schedule, the fewer than normal days off) are absent from a non-assisted hiker's burden.

As I said earlier, each is hard in its own way and which one is harder will depend on the individual.

[dixicritter]

Actually FD as I've been corrected many times past, the ATC doesn't recognize thru hikers at all only 2000 milers.

I've learned that part by heart...LOL

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

Actually FD as I've been corrected many times past, the ATC doesn't recognize thru hikers at all only 2000 milers.

I've learned that part by heart...LOL

::: Dino blushes :::
Perhaps I should say the ATC says nothing about what you carry on your back to be a 2000 miler.

[Lilred]

I've done some fairly decent long distance hikes and I personally think it would be much harder mentally to do a traditional thru-hike than WD's circle expedition. Think about it, as the expedition hikes, they know that at the end of the day there will be a known place to camp and a van waiting for them with whatever they may need. There is a lot of security and stress relief in that situation. Plus, you have a commitment with a large group of people every day that will bolster you and keep you going when things get tough. Solo thru hikers don't have that commitment to a larger group, they're on their own, regardless of the strong bonds they made.

Which brings me to a query of mine. I wonder what the correlation is between completion rates and the kind of friendships that are built on the trail. I wonder if the ability to form strong bonds has any relation to completion rate. People give all kinds of reasons why people quit the trail, but I don't recall seeing anyone talk about people quitting because they can't make friends. I'm betting it happens a lot. The strong bonds formed by the circle expeditions, combined with the security each night, I think would make the thru easier and account for the completion rate. I'm curious Warren, the one expedition that didn't have 100% completion, was that because of conflicting personalities or some other reason?

[Mags]

The reason 80% fail on thru hikes is because it IS far more difficult to complete while carrying a full pack.

What if you carry a merely half-full pack BUT a box of wine and make some no-bake cheese cake?

Of course, some times I carry a 3/4 full pack and don't make the cheese cake. I do carry the wine, though. Have to keep up the standards afer all.

(Hmm..maybe there should be a fudge factor? Perhaps a 7/8 full pack and perhaps a mere cup of wine?)

[emerald]

Warren, I enjoyed reading your group-thru-hike history post. I recently pointed out to someone off-board how many thru-hikes I thought 1980 UConn Expedition members completed before their 1980 hike. I believe the circle atop Katahdin in 1980 may have had far more to do with experience than anything else. What do you think?

You know, I wish A.T. hikers would use the terms day-hike(er) and day-hiking. I find it odd the terms slackpack(er) and slackpacking could both be antonyms of themselves. I don't know if that's possible or if I even constructed my last sentence correctly. Maybe I should consult an English instructor or post on other topics.

I'm glad it's all hiking anyway and doesn't really matter to many if not most hikers. The others may still find a more constructive way of looking at such things someday. I think ATC sorted out that part of what consistutes a 2000 miler long ago as did many who post here.

[chief]

I ran into WD's group in 2000, though not the man himself. Thought their method of hiking a little strange, but hey, each to his own! They seemed to be having a good time and no different than other hikers, except for the crazy asian guy hiking nekkid. No biggie (pun intended)!

[Marta]

What if you carry a merely half-full pack BUT a box of wine and make some no-bake cheese cake?

Of course, some times I carry a 3/4 full pack and don't make the cheese cake. I do carry the wine, though. Have to keep up the standards afer all.

(Hmm..maybe there should be a fudge factor? Perhaps a 7/8 full pack and perhaps a mere cup of wine?)

On my upcoming JMT hike, I'm carrying a full pack AND either MH Blueberry Cheesecake or Raspberry Crumble for almost every night out. In a freakin' bear canister, no less. (No wine, though. We all have our priorities.)

Do I get extra points? Does it make up for my extensive use of shuttle services and cooperative friends on my AT hike?

Seriously, I completely disagree that carrying a full pack in and of itself defines the difficulty of a hike. The relentless pace the circle expeditions set, combined with the fact that you have agreed to keep up, no ifs ands or buts, sounds very hard. If I were offered a choice of joining the Circle or hiking my own hike carrying my full pack every day, I think the second option would be easier for me.

I say that as someone who did quite a lot of light-pack hiking last year. I eventually decided that it was often easier to have a heavier pack and a more flexible schedule than to leave weight behind but have to be a certain place at a certain time. Don't get me wrong--I love hiking with a day pack and showering and sleeping indoors at the end of the day--but it's not always the easiest option, especially if you make yourself do long miles when you're day-packing it.

Marta/Five-Leaf

[rumbler]

There is no way in hell I could put up with the constraints and dynamics of a rigid group hike.

If you walked all the miles on the AT then in my book you have hiked the AT. And we each get to choose how we want to walk it. Everyone is getting their own thrill out of it, and I never really have seen the point of comparing my chosen adventures with anyone else's.

For the people who choose to do the AT in this style - good luck. It sounds too much like the job I'm leaving behind for my tastes, but to each his own.

[Hikerhead]

There is no way in hell I could put up with the constraints and dynamics of a rigid group hike.

If you walked all the miles on the AT then in my book you have hiked the AT. And we each get to choose how we want to walk it. Everyone is getting their own thrill out of it, and I never really have seen the point of comparing my chosen adventures with anyone else's.

For the people who choose to do the AT in this style - good luck. It sounds too much like the job I'm leaving behind for my tastes, but to each his own.

I agree with Rumbler. It sounds like another 9 to 5 job to me. Who wants to be dictated on how many miles you have to walk, where you're going to camp, day after day. Its not for me but for somebody else, it might be the hike made in heaven.

[fiddlehead]

Having done thru hikes both with support (triple crown attempt 2001/2002) and carrying a full pack (all my other thrus), I'd say in retrospect that it is a lot easier with the van support. Especially in the winter.

When you finish your hike at the end of the day, you know you have a great big meal coming up. complete with sausage, potatoes, desert, etc. while listening to a good stereo out of the rain. In the morning, we usually had a dozen eggs and a lb of bacon for the 2 of us, along with a huge pot of real coffee while we planned our day via our computer and printed out the days maps.

We rarely (weren't always at the van) had to get up and pound into our frozen running shoes, putting on yesterdays wet and cold or frozen socks. (oh, it's the 5th day of rain, now all my gear is wet, i wonder where the next laundromat is and how long a hitch it will be, damn i wish i was hiking with a girl so i could get a ride easier)

If we were craving "little debbies" that's what our driver would pick up for us at the next store they saw, and we'd most likely have them that night.

In the winter time, i was able to sleep in a -30 deg. bag or had the choice of a 0 deg bag or a +20.

I had clean clothes, satellite radio through a 300 watt amp, and if i wanted a side trip to Vegas one day, no problem, no hitching, just go there and enjoy their AYCE. (it was only a 4 hour drive from cottonwood creek, ca)

The problem with the support van is that you don't get to build fires because you need to stay warm, keep walking because the tentsites have all turned into a mud puddle, stop and enjoy a place because you like it too much, get to a town and hope that they have your maildrop, favorite lipton, a hamburger joint, or bar.

And most importantly, there's not that sense of being in the wild nearly as much. It's more like hiking day to day rather than resupply to resupply.

[minnesotasmith]

The ATC does not specify that a pack must be carried to attain thru-hiker status - only that the entire AT must be hiked in a single season - so WD's successful participants are indeed thru-hikers by the ATC definition.

WD has noted that the experience is different from the non-assisted thru-hikes attempted by others. Some of the requirements for a non-supported hike (carrying everything one needs pretty much the entire length of the trail, planning one's own meals and sleeping arrangements, etc.) are absent while some of the requirements for WD's hike (the group dynamic, the number of miles hiked, the rigid schedule, the fewer than normal days off) are absent from a non-assisted hiker's burden.

As I said earlier, each is hard in its own way and which one is harder will depend on the individual.

The ATC also does not consider any hiker classification higher than 2000-miler to exist. I agree with them on both issues, BTW.

[rickb]

The ATC does not rank being a 2000 Miler as being higher in clasification than being a day hiker or a weekender. It is, what it is.

[shelterbuilder]

There is no way in hell I could put up with the constraints and dynamics of a rigid group hike...For the people who choose to do the AT in this style - good luck. It sounds too much like the job I'm leaving behind for my tastes, but to each his own.

I would assume that Warren's 2.5 (month?) preparation period serves to get everyone on the same page, in much the same way that basic training would get new recruits "up to speed" - not only with their equipment, but functioning as a cohesive group under "adverse" conditions. Those that can't make the grade simply "wash out", while those that can, are able to handle the constraints and dynamics of a hike of this kind.

Personally, I think that I would prefer the latitude to be able to wander down a blue-blaze trail without regard for how it might affect my daily "white line" mileage, or to be able to do a zero day at a great shelter/campsite, or stay in town an extra day, and not have to worry about getting off-schedule. That's my perfect world. HYOH!

[rickb]

Having done thru hikes both with support (triple crown attempt 2001/2002) and carrying a full pack (all my other thrus), I'd say in retrospect that it is a lot easier with the van support.

Makes sense.

But let me ask you this: If on each of your hikes you were faced with the additional challenge of either making together with the same 8 or 10 people you started with, how do you think you would have fared?

No lets supose those 8 or 10 people were not hand picked former LD hikers, but rather a bunch of first timers.

You think you would have made it all the way? Together?