100 Day Thru-Hike for Students ?

[icemanat95]

I'm in the "doable, but why?" category. Why do you want to commit yourselves to what, in essence, would be a high stress death march.

I've met folks trying to do what you are proposing, and they were miserable. Their feet were a bloody wreck (and I mean that literally) they never really MET anyone on the trail, they were constantly pushing, never had time to stop and smell the flowers, or the pines, or the ramps, or whatever.

Why do you want to hike the AT? Are you just putting a notch in your belt? If so, cease and desist. The AT isn't an extreme sport. Nor is it some elite training ground. At it's simplest, it is a long vacation. At it's most profound, it is a sacred journey of the spirit.

If all you want to do is punch out the miles and say you did it, then cut out the middle man, go down to Mexico for the Summer, come back and say you hiked the AT. No one is going to call you a liar, because no-one will know one way or the other. Sure you will be cheating yourself, but if you run through the whole 2170 mile trip, you'll be cheating yourself anyhow.

Someone once suggested that there should be an award for the longest continuous thru-hike (without excessive town time). I tend to concur with that. I'm not just saying that because my hike was long (6 months, 8 days), but because in that 6 months, 8 days, I still felt like I had to rush and was missing stuff I ought to have spent time to see. There are a thousand blue-blazed side trails to waterfalls and scenic overlooks, little loop trails leading into little coves and grottos. They shouldn't be missed. You could spend a month hiking the various loops and side trails in the White Mountains alone, and The Great Smoky Mountain Park deserves far more attention than most thru-hikers give her. The same for the Shenandoah, and Grayson Highlands and Mt. Rogers State Parks.

If you really want to hike the AT, don't rush it. Don't squash it in between two other goals. Give it its due. Wait until you graduate and do it then, when you can give it the time it needs to be truly savored. If it is so important to you that you cannot wait till you graduate, then take a semester off and give it a solid go.

I got the bug to thru-hike the AT when I was a 21 year old soldier sitting in a hospital bed at Ft. Benning, GA after breaking my leg in a parachute landing (the jump went fine, the landing sucked). I saw "Five Millions Steps" on the television and knew exactly what I was going to do when I got out of the Army. When it came time to outprocess I had no money, the economy sucked and I had few prospects for making money. I put off my hike, married my sweetheart, went through a series of crummy temp jobs, divorced my sweetheart, and then inherited some money from my grandparents. I took that money and whatever I could save up, and hit the trail. I was 26 years old and turned 27 on the trail just South of Rangley, Maine.

I spent a ton of time on the trail and spent my credit card into the ground to support my hike and get the most I could get out of it without worry. That was a great 6 months and I learned a lot about myself on that hike, not all of it pleasant, but it was good to know. If I had been rushing to meet my original goal of a 4.5-5 month hike, I wouldn't have met a lot of great people or seen a lot of great things. Sure it took a couple years to pay my way out of it, but that was OK. I only wish I had another month of it.

Give it the time it deserves, or don't bother at all.

[Blue Jay]

Peaks, step away from Roland's book, better yet burn it. It sucked when it was published and it is outdated garbage now. Roland was (is?) a boring person who interviewed only boring people because they were the only ones who would talk to him. You cannot possibly think the mile slaves would slow down to take his biased survey? To all future mile slaves go for it, life is too short not to try.

[hungryhowie]

Peaks, step away from Roland's book, better yet burn it. It sucked when it was published and it is outdated garbage now. Roland was (is?) a boring person who interviewed only boring people because they were the only ones who would talk to him. You cannot possibly think the mile slaves would slow down to take his biased survey? To all future mile slaves go for it, life is too short not to try.

Roland's book is, at best, absolute mis-information for planning a thruhike in today's world. When I thruhiked in 2000 (just three years ago!), the photon light was the only L.E.D. light on the market (though CMG introduced the Infinity while we were out there); the lightest waterproof jacket was Goretex Packlite (Precip and other w/b coatings were introduced later that Spring), the only ultralight packs on the market were the G4 and the Breeze, Hennessey Hammocks had just been conceived, and Trangia had the corner on the market of the alcohol stove. Think how the world of long distance hiking has changed since 1987!

Websites such as this are the best way to plan thruhikes nowdays. If a book is a must, Karen Berger's Hiking the Triple Crown is the best (there are 4 sections - 1 on thruhiking in general, 1 on the specifics for the AT, 1 on the PCT, and 1 on the CDT). It's much more current info, and more "true to life" than Roland's.

Burn it, throw it away, whatever; just don't quote stuff out of it like its accurate.

-Howie

[max patch]

A 100 day / 14 week hike requires you to hike almost 26 miles a day - every day - 6 days out of every week with 1 day a week to resupply and rest.

Some can hike those kind of miles. Most can't. Neither I nor anyone else here knows which category you fit in.

Go hike your 100 days. If you finish, great. If not, you can alway finish up later.

[tlbj6142]

Why do you want to commit yourselves to what, in essence, would be a high stress death march.

I don't understand this statement. Doing 25 miles per day for 6-day weeks is not a death march. I just don't understand the thinking in which doing "big miles" (25 is not big) is the equivalent to running through the woods with your eyes shut. That just ain't true. This line of thinking is has to be some strange "AT thing". Just because you "don't have to", doesn't make it "insane" if you do.

A couple of months ago, I had a chance to hike along a trail in western PA (the laural highland hiking trail). One day I hiked 20 miles (and I'm an old lazy fat bastard) in 12 hours. I forced myself to stop every hour for 10-15 minutes. I had a 30 minute lunch. And a bit of sunning for over an hour on a nice rock out-croping. I arrived at camp with well over an hour of daylight left. I felt fine.

I think part of the problem is the social aspects of the AT put way too much pressure on you to "stay with the family", etc. Once you remove your self from those pressures, "doing big miles" doesn't become this so called "death march".

I've read dozens of times that "the people are the greatest thing along the AT". Well, hiking with the same 5 people for 2 months doesn't exactly give you a chance to meet "the greatest part of the AT", does it? The "typical" thru just doesn't want to stop and talk along the trail. They only seem to be willing to do so at shelters/towns or other designated spots. As such, if you want to experience "the greatest thing of the AT", you have to spend (waste!!) way too much time hanging out in shelters, towns, etc. There are other "great" things that can be found along the AT, meeting "the people" just happens to be easiest (read: for those that are too lazy to look elsewhere) item to find.

I can meet great people at work, school, church, etc. What makes meeting "the people" along the trail any different?

There are a thousand blue-blazed side trails to waterfalls and scenic overlooks, little loop trails leading into little coves and grottos. They shouldn't be missed.

Except for beer, food, shelter, blue-blaze (because a particular route is easier) or yellow-blaze (gotta keep up with my "trail family"), how many thrus actually leave the trail just to hike a "beautiful section of the eastern USA"? Probably not too many. Section hiker, maybe, thru I doubt it. I have read three journals (I know not a good sampling) none of the three folks left the trail for a view (100 yrds doesn't count) or fun. They always seemed to be heads down trying to do another "big mile" day (15 miles!?!!). Followed by double zeroes.

If you are in shape and have the mental ability to pace yourself, 25-30 miles a day is not a big deal. Especially when you concider you have 15 hours of day light to do it. That gives you 9 hours to sleep! Who sleeps 9 hours on the trail? Drunks?

I'm not picking on you iceman, as I know you are not the only one who made these sort of comments in this (and other related) threads. Your messages just seemed to be the final "nail in the coffen" so to speak.

[rickb]

I just deleated my post, because I wanted to comment on the idea of pressure on the Trail.

IMHO, a 110 day hike with a partner almost guarantees stress. Even without a partner, I think it is almost inevitable.

Perhaps I am projecting my own personality charteristics on others; but so be it. Mine is just one opinion.

Hiking 20 or 25 mile days for a week is nothing like keeping that pace up over months. It just isn't.

As for your comments about the social aspect, you might be right. I met one person going in the same direction as me, and hiked with him for less than a week. I took just one zero day, and that only because the PO was closed. I had a different hike than most write about. Better? Worse? No, just different. We probably think alike on that.

But if you can put yourself on a 110-day schedule and not feel a great deal of stress day in day out, then more power to you. If you can do that with a partner (with whom you have not already established a long-distance hiking resume) , then I will be in awe.

I don't think many people could. If you believe you are one of them, great. If you believe you partner is also, wonderfull. But have a plan B. With any "investment", it is wise to re-evaluate your portfolio as market conditions change. And if your first investment choice does not yield the kind of dividends you go in confident that you will earn, you need not pull out of the market all together.

Iceman, you are a true friend to future hikers.

Rick B

[RagingHampster]

Last spring I attempted to hike a local "Long Distance Trail" end to end (about 120miles), and called it quits after a few days. I simply was not enjoying myself. So I flipflopped and section hiked other portions. I might have "pushed through" and "Did the trail", but it would have been a miserable week.

My point is, I hope your doing this for fun, and not to "add a notch to your belt" as was put in an above post. When I here someone talk about a thru as a "Financial Investment", It makes me wonder...

But I think once you hit the trail everything will be layed down in simple terms like it always is.

[rumbler]

I just don't understand the thinking in which doing "big miles" (25 is not big) is the equivalent to running through the woods with your eyes shut. That just ain't true. ... One day I hiked 20 miles (and I'm an old lazy fat bastard) in 12 hours. I forced myself to stop every hour for 10-15 minutes. I had a 30 minute lunch. And a bit of sunning for over an hour on a nice rock out-croping. I arrived at camp with well over an hour of daylight left. I felt fine.

With respect I have to completely disagree with you on this one. One twenty mile day can be easy, especially in VA or Maryland. On a nice day. Try doing six of them. In a row. In the rain. And then realize that you have thirteen or fourteen more weeks of the same pace to go. Probably in the rain. Sorry, but that kind of pace on an AT thruhike is anything but easy. It will beat you up, regardless of what kind of shape you are in. Furthermore, my observation was that people trying to maintain some predetermined frenetic pace even while their bodies where telling them to chill for awhile ended up dropping from the trail like mayflies. And many of these people were strong hikers. Doing it in 100 days might be realistic but it is going to beat on you big time.

Iceman makes some really good points. I took seven months and wish I could have taken more. And should I ever go back again I will not be racing through it. I missed too much and there would be too many new things I would want to see.

You have 100 days. If finishing the AT is your primary goal - and that certainly is a great goal - then by all means sprint through it. On the other hand I think you may find yourself wishing later on that you had been more flexible in your hike. And there is nothing wrong with hiking only half of the AT because you only had three months. The rest of it will wait for you.

[Highlander II]

100 day thru-hikes are definitely doable and can even be enjoyable. I enjoyed my hike this summer at just under 100 days, including 2 zero days. There were several others who were hiking at the same rate.

I also section hiked over two summers, 1991, 1992. This was a different time with much heavier gear and much less information about the trail being available. On this hike I was to start out with a partner from Springer and hike the whole trail over the summer of college. To make the story shorter -- my partner dropped out a month before we were to leave and I decided to start at Damacus in mid-May instead of at Springer to be with more people as I was concerned about hiking alone. My partner dropping out before I left was the best thing that could have happened for this trip and I will credit that as a major reason why I was able to finish on Katahdin that first year with only 450 miles to go the next. Incidentally I finished Aug 15 and probably had enough time to complete the whole trail if I'd only known beforehand.

I have several suggestions based on the original question:

1) Get all your own gear and don't plan on staying with your partner. If you end up staying together, then great but don't plan on it. You or your partner may find that one of you has different goals than the other and will end up parting ways because of that.

2) Lighten up your pack as much as possible. My base pack weight this year was around 16 pounds. I certainly could have lightened it up while hiking but I had something which worked and wasn't willing to spend the time to experiment while out hiking.

3) Train for the hike. In 1991/1992 I did almost no training but I was 19/20 years old. I had knee problems for most of the trip which I attribute wholey to the lack of training. This year I trained intensely and started off slower than I probably needed to and had no knee problems.

4) As others have said and I agree, start off at Springer and see how far you get. Consistently doing large miles (what the definition of large is, is a matter of personal opinion) is mental as well as physical and you may find that you don't want to do more than 5, 10, 15, 20, etc. miles per day. For me 30 miles per day plus or minus 2 miles is about the maximum I'm comfortable with. For reference, some days this would take until 5:30 pm and others 8:30 pm.

5) If you end up doing 25+ mile days, be prepared for the "why?" question because you'll get it a lot.

6) Just getting out there to attempt a thru-hike is an accomplishment in an of itself. I've talked to many who said "I wish I could do that". They never even attempt to plan to go. You've gotten to the planning stage so you've made the next step.

Lastly, hiking with only $1500 is totally doable. I spent a little over $1800 this year (not including gear) which included $400 in travel expenses to and from the trail. (I really wanted to get home from Mt. Katahdin and spent $300 for that alone.) A bulk of the additional money was hotel costs. My journal on trailjournals.com has a little better breakdown of expenses than I can remember right now.

Good luck!!!

[tlbj6142]

In the rain. And then realize that you have thirteen or fourteen more weeks of the same pace to go. Probably in the rain.

I always forget about the $hity weather of the AT. It is one thing other long trails don't have as much of. I'm sure it plays a bigger part in the "pace" of the "typical" AT thru than any other single item.

Though, it too, is a mental hurdle, not a physical one. Most folks just choose to hide in shelters or towns once it awhile to escape it.

Given this, I'll soften my stance a bit. If you can overcome the $hity weather, social pressures and (in your case) "partner issues", you can finish the AT in 15 weeks. Those just happen to be Clingman Dome sized hurdles.

Good luck.

[tlbj6142]

If you end up doing 25+ mile days, be prepared for the "why?" question because you'll get it a lot.

Great comments Highlander. Interesting that you mentioned the social pressures that make big miles difficult. What was your answer? Why did others think you were "nuts"? What the heck to people do when they are not hiking?

I HATE camping, it is the hiking I love. Camp is just too damn boring (eat, talk, drink?!?!). I'd rather hike longer and just sleep in camp.

[Highlander II]

I actually don't know why people seemed to think I was crazy/nuts to do 25+ miles a day. It didn't seem like much of a big deal to me...

I would guess they couldn't understand how it was physically possible to do that many miles consistently as they were "thru-hikers" and were doing 10, 15, 20, etc. miles per day.

As for my answer to the "Why?" question. Unless they were complete jerks about it, my usual answer was "I like to hike, so I hike all day." or "I get bored being in camp." If they were jerks about it, I usually would answer "I go by the 'hike your own hike' motto, I can not understand how you can do only x miles and not be completely bored out of your mind in camp for 8 hours out of the day". I guess it was mainly an ego thing and those with big egos couldn't cope with the fact that there was someone faster than them. I personally expected to be passed from day one and was by a few, though I don't think they finished. But so what if they were faster -- the AT is not a race, whether you do it in one year in xxx days or do it over the period of 30 years. We're all 2000 milers.

Incidentally usually the "why?" question was prefaced with the "When did you start?", "Wow I started on xx of xx month [a month before], how many miles are you doing per day?" questions. I got these two questions from absolutely everyone I met. I tried to be supportive of everyone because I truly believe in the "hike your own hike" motto.

Hike your own hike!!!

[tlbj6142]

Interesting how much "competition" (external or internal) there is between hikers. In fact, it seems odd that folks would even ask these questions (how many miles today? When did you start, etc.). Seems like questions that just force folks to become competitive and/or defensive.

Kinda of like walking up to someone at school and asking their GPA. And, then, giving them a hard time if it is "only a 2.5".

Wouldn't a better question be "how was your walk today?" Any good views? See any frogs along the trail? What's the deal with your pink socks?

[Peaks]

Peaks, step away from Roland's book, better yet burn it. It sucked when it was published and it is outdated garbage now. Roland was (is?) a boring person who interviewed only boring people because they were the only ones who would talk to him. You cannot possibly think the mile slaves would slow down to take his biased survey? To all future mile slaves go for it, life is too short not to try.

Yes, the book is dated, and does have its faults. But, it's still the best source I know of for a resonable survey of thru-hikers. Without it, you, me, and everyone else can only comment on their own personal experience.

At least I'm telling you what my source of information is, and when the data was taken. So, there are some facts, even if dated, behind my statements, not just an opinion.

And, because I know some individuals surveyed, I do not agree that he only got interviews from boring people.

On this thread, you have an individual (or couple) asking if it's feasible to hike the AT in 100 days. Did you do it in 100 days? I know I didn't, and don't have the desire to do it in 100 days either.

By the way, Pace-O was one fast hiker in 2002. How long did he take? And what does he have to say about this?

[hungryhowie]

Yes, the book is dated, and does have its faults. But, it's still the best source I know of for a resonable survey of thru-hikers. Without it, you, me, and everyone else can only comment on their own personal experience.

At least I'm telling you what my source of information is, and when the data was taken. So, there are some facts, even if dated, behind my statements, not just an opinion.

Yes yes yes...

And while you do state where your information comes from, some people, perhaps, might not realize how old this information is, or how much aspects of the trial have changed in the past 15+ years. This is why it just befuddles me that people continue to quote info from this survey. Individual input on boards like this is invaluable - while it is certainly not a condensed orchestrated work like Roland's book, it ecompases a much wider view (this board, for expample has nearly 2000 members! and there are several boards like this out there) because of its larger sample of the hiking population, and provides an interesting and more up-to-date synthesis of current hiking trends. I laughed heartily after reading Roland's book the first time, but stopped short after realizing that people could actually be using it to plan a thruhike nowdays.

-Howie

[A-Train]

Yellow Jacket,
What is the big deal with people doing things differently? You seem to have so much animosity and pent up anger over folks who are "wasting time" sitting at shelters all day or in town being lazy. HYOH! Why don't you whistle on by and just ignore these folks? And what's the big deal with people enjoying the social aspect of the Trail. I don't understand your point. Its fairly easy to say that people are the best part of the Trail when hiking "with the same 5 people for 2 months". That gives one the chance to really get to know that person and grow with them. I doubt most people have the opportunity to get to know 5 or 6 diverse strangers and live along side them for a couple months. sure you can meet people at your school, church or whatever, but the point is that you see them for a couple hours a day or week and that is it. People on the Trail can't hide or use distractions like in "the other world". This IMO allows others to open up and trust their trail friends. Mostly normal day life is too hectic and informal to truely get deeply inside others hearts and heads.
I was one of those hikers who you seem to continuely hate and slander. YES me. I got to shelters at 4 or 5 pm after hiking a 20 plus mile day, then I went on to sit on my fat butt and talk to my thru-hiker friends (only 5 of them) and we wasted valuable hiking time where we could have easily done another ten miles and seen more trail and wildlife. The fact is that some people, myself included actually enjoy the scnenary around shelters, taking time to prepare a decent meal and maybe reading a good book or singing a song. Sometimes it was fun to hike out to an overlook and catch a sunrise. My point is that there are other ways to hike. Why is this necessarily a waste of time?? Sure if i went by your method I woulda been done with my hike 2 months earlier, but it wasn't a race and my intention wasn't to spend as least amount of time as possible in the backcountry. And whats the problem with hikers spending time in town. For some the town experience is an opportunity to see small town america, meet friendly folks and also hang out with others lazy hikers who might wanna rest a bit. Don't like it? Go back to the woods, no one is making you stay in town or even look at those resting.
And back to people. Yeah you might hike with 5 others but you meet lots of other folks. I met hundreds of thru-hikers, sectioners and day hikers as well as friendly towns folks. I'm not saying the people have to be the best part of everyones hikes. But if you're not a social person than don't knock other peoples need to socialize, interact and get to know those around them.
The fact is, that someone hiking the Trail in 100 days will not ever meet anyone more than once for the most part.
And lastly, to some extent I understand and agree with your hike all day philosophy. Sure it makes sense. When you break it down you make it seem like there should be no reason why everyone doesn't hike 30 miles a day. The fact is, even tho you're not hiking any faster, it still is more physically and mentally demanding. Your not allowing your body any real time to rest. I know i personally couldnt get up at 530 and start walking all day and then plop down, go to sleep and get up and do it again. To me thats like running without a cool down walk. Its abrupt. I needed the transistion cool-down time for a couple hours before and after i started to hike.
I agree 100 percent that hiking the trail in 100 days is mostly a mental challenge. Most hikers are scared by the idea of a 25 or 30 mile day, they don't think its possible. But to me that entails a certain mentality that would make me feel like im constantly on the go, needing to go further and further, not being able to enjoy something for a couple hours or half a day if i really wanted to. It doesn't seem fair to have to compromise with yourself on a thru-hike and not stop somewhere just because you "can't". Then you're setting boundaries on yourself. If you have the mentality of going all day, it seems as if you're never content with where you are, as you always need to keep going. And that Katahdin is the only goal. Katahdin is just another mountain. Its every day that makes the trip what it is.
Back to the original purpose of this post-i think as well as others that if this is just an accomplishment, its hardly worth doing. Whats the point if its just to say you did it? The Trail is there to be enjoyed and as a tool to learn more about yourself and become a better person (or atleast for me). The hikers who were doing it as a physical award or accomplishment seemed to have a lot less fun.
And lastly, yes the hike all day, take 10-15 min breaks everyday sounds great in theory. But have you done it for 100 straight days? If you did i'd love to hear about it. The fact is that sometimes it's not possible due to weather or other circumstances. Its easy enough to do over a week or so, but doing it over months is a whole different ballgame. Occasionally you might just not want to hike thru the weather or want to take breaks in a driving cold rain storm. In that case it might be necessary to whole up in those boxes where you just might have to talk/eat and drink with other people.

[Colter]

I personally believe that the speed of your hike is a personal choice, just as the speed of a daily run is. Some folks want to see the world go by on a run, and some just want to challenge themselves. To me a 100 day hike isn't a waste if that's what YOU want to do.

It's possible to do the AT in 100 days, because some people have done it. To a very few people it's easy, to a few more it's possible, for most people it is, for all practical purposes, impossible.

The PCT is not the AT, a week hike is not a thru-hike, and you are not Flyin' Brian. Contrary to what some folks have said, stringing together a 100 day series of 22 mile days is a big deal. There's always injuries and other medical emergencies, family emergencies, etc.

Consider that maybe 10% (more or less) of folks starting out on a thru-hike complete a thru-hike in a calendar year. Maybe it's mental, maybe it's physical, but for whatever reason, they decide to quit.

Far, far less do it in less than 100 days.

Far fewer can make a hike of that speed with another person.

If you both of you are very good athletes with very good focus and are in very good health, you probably have the POTENTIAL to do it. The reality is that you'll probably fail.

It's your life and your decision. Life is full of risks. Just look at it realistically before you start.

[tlbj6142]

What is the big deal with people doing things differently? You seem to have so much animosity and pent up anger over folks who are "wasting time" sitting at shelters all day or in town being lazy. HYOH! Why don't you whistle on by and just ignore these folks? And what's the big deal with people enjoying the social aspect of the Trail. I don't understand your point.

I really don't have a problem with folks that want to hike that way. It just seems that all too often it is described as "the only way to hike". If you have the time take 6 months to complete a thru, do so. But, understand that you can do it another way and get just as much out of the trip. And that it is "OK" and "not insane" to hike it in 105 days.

I'm just amazed at how quickly people pipe up and say "no fricken way". "I did in in 5 months and I thought I was rushed".

Sorry if I was offsensive towards you or others, as I don't mean to be. I just want folks to understand it is possible to hike the trail in 105 days and not "run", "feel rushed" or "pressured". Now, it takes quite of bit of physical (lots of pre-trip conditioning) and mental planning, but it can be done. And it can be just as enjoyable as someone who takes 6 months to finish.

A-typical doesn't make it wrong.

[kellett117]

Wow ... I did not mean to begin such a firey debate.

I am a person who likes to challenge himself. When I do something, I want to push myself to the max. I feel a great sense of accomplishment when I can do something that is physically or mentally difficult.

To a certain extent, I do take a bit of exception to those who say I shouldn't bother if I want to do it just so I can tell myself I did it.

Iceman says: "If all you want to do is punch out the miles and say you did it, then cut out the middle man, go down to Mexico for the Summer, come back and say you hiked the AT." I think one must understand that people are allowed to have different motivations for undertaking such a task, and no one motivation can be more righteous, legitimate, or fundamentally "right" than another. I want to hike the AT so I can have an experience of a lifetime with my best friend and when I'm done, yes, be able to say that I did it and be proud of it.

I want to experience the AT to the fullest extent that I can while I'm on the trail, but I'm not ashamed to say that I will be very proud when I'm done. If people ask, then yes, I'll tell them I did it in 100 days and that I'm proud of that fact. The Appalachian Trail is a resource that is available to anyone who wishes to take advantage of it, and they can use it and hike it for whatever reason they feel they want.

I asked in the beginning if it was possible that I could do the trail in 100 days. Some people said I could and why. Others said I could not and why. Those are the answers I take into consideration and consider most valuable. I thank each one of you who gave me one of those answers.

I hope I've made my motivation for hiking this trail clear. If you disagree, you disagree ... but I'm not going to Mexico.

[tlbj6142]

I did not mean to begin such a firey debate.

You didn't begin this debate. It has been going on (in other forms and forums) for quite some time. Your question just brought it to the forefront in this particular place.

As Highlander mentioned above, the "debate" happens along the trail everyday. And you have exposed the little known secret of those that quote the HYOH creed. HYOH really means "Hike your own hike within these parameters. If you hike outside these parameters you can't be having fun, or enjoying yourself, etc." As such, they feel threaten and fight back. Instead of accepting it as a "valid" option.

Enjoy your hike. In whatever form it takes...