I have been backpacking for 30+ years and have always used trekking poles, for years only one and the last couple of years two. This fall I tried going without any and was amazed at how much easier the actual hiking was. I moved freer and used less energy. My stride seems more natural.I missed them in situations where I needed them for stability, like stream crossings but overall the experience has been positive. I will try it a few more times before I discard the poles but so far it looks like without may be the way to go for me. YMMV

Interesting, to say the least. I started out using one pole, like Colin Fletcher (and since I didn't live in agave country, I used a "utility" handle from the local hardware store.) I switched to two, and like them, but I've tried hiking with one pole or no poles a few times, just for fun, and haven't been put off by it. As my load decreased from 25 to 20 to 16 pounds, I've questioned whether they're really necessary. Maybe I'll copy you, and give it a try.

I'm fully aware that trekking poles rob some energy and impede your stride, however, my knees that have seen 4 decades of working on roofs and hardwood floors would highly disagree that I discontinue their use. I'd be done without them, as would my wife, who suffers from some balance problems. They're not for everyone. I didn't use them until I hit 55. There is absolutely no way I'd be ln the middle of planning our third descent into the Grand Canyon without them. If you have healthy joints and no balance issues, they seem a little redundant.

As I've gotten older, I find I can't handle as rugged a terrain as I used to; accordingly, that's taken some of the pressure off my knees. However, passing years may bring that into play more and more - so I'm not ruling out the poles. Also, they prevent the mid-afternoon edema (right term?) that makes my hands feel puffy if I don't use them.

I'm torn - but I may experiment a bit.

I think that age and activity is a factor here. I find that at 75 my pace and distance is down to half what it was 30 years ago. My balance is not what it was and therefore I proceed much more cautiously. In the past I also noticed the edema but now that you mention it I have not noticed it lately but that is probably due to shorter less intense hiking. Getting older is not a bad thing but it certainly changes how and why we do things but that is a discussion for the over the hill section.

I now use two poles; for many years I only used one. If I am negotiating rough rocky trail, I use them because the consequences of falling are worse at my age (78) than when I was younger and also because my stability has decreased. I also use the poles to help on steep uphill sections and where water bars form high steps. For normal walking and for downhill, I just carry them in one hand like a fishing pole. The poles interfere with my normal stride so I only use them for assistance on steep uphill and for fall-prevention.

Last spring I did use the poles on a few stretches going down the Hermit Trail in the Grand Canyon but not at all coming out on the Bright Angel Trail. When I walked the West Highland Way in Scotland last July, I didn't use poles at all.

Yeah, it's funny. I sometimes leave them on the pack day hiking unless it's a really lousy trail or I'm going downhill. Or late in the day when I'm fatigued. I like having my hands free for taking pictures.

Month or so ago I hiked down a river canyon then back up, leaving the poles on the pack. No problem. Until the next day when one of my knees yelled at me for the next week. Correlation? Probably, since I "don't" get knee problems, it's ankles I'm watching out for. Lesson learned. If my car had a manual transmission I couldn't have pressed the clutch pedal.

The remark about leaving them on the pack just reminded me: we're the same folks that went to see Walk in the Woods and wondered why Bill and Katz never used the poles they had lashed to their packs!

Quote:

"I will try it a few more times before I discard the poles but so far it looks like without may be the way to go for me."

I'm usually a two-stick hiker, but on pretty flat stretches of good trail I'll more commonly carry the poles without using them.

I just came back from hiking the Camino de Santiago in Spain and was glad that I did that without poles. There are a few days/situations there where poles would be nice; I did this more so that I could get by without checking baggage, but really I found it was just a great way to go.

I'll continue to use poles on more "normal" (U.S. style backpacking) trails.

Each to their own!

Thinking of a fun trip down the Speyside Way hooking up with the Moray Coast Trail in Scotland and I was wondering if I really needed poles with the 10-15lb pack I'm envisioning carrying.

Was there much rough ground up and down on the Camino or the West Highland Way? Found the poles mighty handy for those steep ascents and descents on some trails or where the trail has left you!

Also the distances projected on these trails seems to be 5-10 miles per day. That doesn't seem like it is too strenuous for long-distance backpacking folks who are used to doing twice that much on a regular basis.

Only problem might be continuing the walk after the distillery tours! Poles might come in handy then, or a good stout walking staff cut from the willows.