Just encountered this on a group hike-and-camp last weekend; the group size was about 12. It was an overnighter, organized by the local backpacking shop (we have a great outfitter, and they do a nice job with these trips.) There was no connection among group members, except that we're all shop customers or staff (there were a couple of husband/wife teams.) Mostly, we didn't know each other well.

On the way in, we pretty much all hiked together (or in 3 or 4 loosely connected groups), and all waited periodically to get everyone together - typically at a trail junction, or somewhere that the trail became a bit hard to follow.

The next morning, we had the typical situation where two of us woke up early (6am), had our packs halfway packed before we left the tent, and finished packing a couple minutes later; we then ate a cold breakfast, and were ready to go by 7:45 - which was about the time everyone else was emerging from their tents, to stumble over to the fire ring and stand around trying to warm up while waiting for someone to ask if it was time for breakfast yet. At the rate they were going, it would be at least 9am until any were ready to leave.

There was no pre-agreed protocol, and neither of us were group leaders. So, the two of us decided to go ahead and start hiking, bid everyone a friendly farewell (they did all turn out to be nice folks), and hit the trail. We had a great early morning hike out, and got to know each other a lot better and found out our hiking and camping styles mesh nicely (in fact, I think I may have found the hiking partner I've been missing the last few years; we've already got another hike planned.)

So, I'm just interested in what the rest of you do in those "social" hiking situations, and what the etiquette might be: would you have set off yourself, or waited until everyone was ready?

I would've been good with what you did no matter which group I was in. Sometimes I'm in the early risers group, and other times I'm slow to get going in the morning. In a larger group, I think it's very useful to be able to split into smaller groups according to hiking style/pace or interest in taking a side trail or different route.

It's probably best that there is discussion and planning ahead of time (the night before?), as some people have less flexible expectations about what happens on a trip.

I belonged to a hiking/climbing club in the 1980's and one thing insisted upon was that the group stay together. It was OK to spread out on the trail, but every hour the front-runners were expected to stop, wait for the rear guard to catch up and let the rear guard have their 5-minute break. Solo sidetrips were not allowed (usually at least one independent soul was kicked out every year for this reason). Group sidetrips were expected to ask the trip leader first.

On the other hand, there was a set time in the morning by which all members of the group were expected to be ready to start. Usually 8:30 am unless we had a long day ahead. On the last day of a trip, it was 7:30 am because of the 3-5-hour drive home.

Key item: did you ask the trip leader's permission before you took off? (S)he is the one responsible for the safety of the group.

I gather that this group wasn't as organized as a formal club, though.

I go out with a group backpacking club from work several times per year. We all agree on a departure time the night before. The harder the next day is, the earlier we leave. It's usually 8AM. That's packs packed, bottles filled, bladders emptied and ready to roll.

Usually there is a laggard or two who are not ready on time. It's usually the newbies. We all give them a good natured ribbing and with a little group pressure they're usually good to go by the second morning. We once had a repeat offender (not a newbie) so we left without him and he had to catch up. He got the message pretty quickly.

Lots of my co-workers are from military backrounds so it's generally a pretty disciplined bunch.

Since your group sounds pretty informal and without preset ground rules, I would say leaving early was not a breach of etiquette.

You're right - it wasn't a formal club. We didn't so much ask the leader's permission as tell him we were leaving: "Hey, Joe, I think we're going to go on and head out." "OK, have a good hike; see you at the store." He seemed OK with it, and have exchanged a couple friendly emails since. (We usually email once or twice a week anyhow, just to stay in touch; I've been on some of the store's other trips, so he knows my style and general skill/ability level.)

Short answer: That is the reason to hike solo.

Sometimes there are reasons to start early - like I have Memorial Day hike that will be a lot easier if we cross one high point when there is still a frozen crust on the snow/slop.

Sometimes there are reasons to dally in camp - short hike out means you end up at the burger place at 10:30.

Sometimes it is important to stay together and other times it is not.

I quit hiking with the local hiking club for several reason:

1. The pace often matched the hare - hurry up and wait.

2. It scared me that a large number of the people seemed to be weak in navigation.

Other than leading Scout troops and other organized youth trips, this year has been my first experience hiking with a group of more than 3 (and we were all 3 so used to hiking with each other that we almost moved as one.)

My main reason for joining was that the other two have both moved away, and I was losing interest in hiking alone. I'm only 60, so I'm not ready to hang up my boots, but I was cancelling too many trips, or coming home early, for really flimsy reasons; it just wasn't fun. I was hoping that I might meet a new partner by going on these trips; I'm kind of hoping that I have. We're nearly the same age, have the same hiking pace and camping style, both married our high school sweethearts, and were both in the Air Force in the early 70s. We really seemed to hit it off, and we've already scheduled another hike (just us, no group.)

From a liability standpoint, any group that advertises a trip has a a de-facto "leader". I lead groups for the California Mountaineering Club. Everyone in the group signed liability waiver. Then every participant had to sign in. Until a participant officially "signed out" he was my responsibility. The leader should have required you to sign out. If you had both been killed (fall in river or something), then family members could sue the leader. This is no minor issue. This group was not like a internet meet-up group. A commercial entity provided the trip. I am surprised they were so casual about this. The interesting thing is that the easier or more mellow the hike, the more you are liable. Climbing for example is considered a highly risky activity thus it is harder to prove negligence. An easy overnight hike with an organized group is considered low risk. When someone's kid or spouse dies in a low-risk activity there is more pointing to negligence.

Leaving a slow person behind is negligence from a liability standpoint. Yes, he "learned his lesson", but again if something happened the leader is liable. Particulary if the person were a newbie. Leaving a person behind is not considered standard operating procedure for an organzied group.

When you sign up with an organized group, it is "one for all and all for one". Agreeing to split into smaller hiking groups with regular meeting points is OK; abandoning someone is not. You help him and/or teach him what needs to be done to get ready on time. You have to deal with all participent's quirks but do not have to invite them on future trips.

From a trip leader's standpoint, having everyone "do their own thing" is disturbing. This is the main reason I quit leading climbs for the CMC. Nobody wanted to be a "follower". I ended up carrying all the responsibility for safety with none of the authority needed to ensure safety.

Do you mind if I pass your comments along to the outfitter? I particularly like the sign-in/sign out comments (they did make us sign waivers; they also had us pre-register, and brought a registration list and checked everyone in when they arrived. No one left the trailhead until everyone was accounted for (we called one no-show, who had something come up at the last minute.)

I'd guess the leader checked us off his list as having left when we left, and he knew how many cars to account for when he returned to the trailhead - but the "sign out" method would remove all doubt about us taking responsibility for ourselves.

By the way, you made me feel a bit guilty. While I'm perfectly willing to take responsibility for myself on the trail, I never stopped to think that I was shirking my responsibility to the outfitter and might be putting the leader on the spot. I would expect my survivors not to sue the outfitter; I know the risks, accept them, and would expect my survivors to honor my decision. (However, since they are "survivors," I wouldn't really be in any position to force them to do so.) I also didn't stop to think that, since most of the others had less experience than I did (some substantially less), maybe the leader could have used my help in getting the group going. Is it possible that I acted a bit selfishly?

This was an extremely low-risk trip: a hike along a shallow creek, on a well marked trail (almost had "Blue Trail - next exit, 200 yards" as markings), in a local metropark, with a couple of road crossings. It was designed to cater to beginners, but there weren't any beginners on this trip. The metropark has two nature preserve-type areas connected by a bike trail; one end of one loop is a former Scout camp, and they use the old troop sites as group backpack campgrounds.

We're taking a longer trip to a Wilderness Area inside Hoosier NF next month, and I suspect two things will happen: first, I would be less likely to ask to leave before the rest of the group, since I've not been there before; second, I suspect the leader will maintain a tighter discipline over the group, since it's going to be a more rugged and isolated area.

After your excellent comments, I'm thinking that since I'll be one of the more experienced backpackers on the trip (and definitely one of the better navigators), I may be a bit more assertive about acting as an "assistant leader" in terms of informally taking charge of a sub-group during the day, if there aren't enough formal leaders to do so. I think I can do it without seeming pushy; I may discuss this with Joe (the leader) before the trip.

Thanks again - that was a very thoughtful and helpful reply.

WD,

Colorado has pretty broad liability for volunteers.

13-21-115.5. Volunteer service act - immunity - exception for operation of motor vehicles.

(1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Volunteer Service Act".

(2) The general assembly finds and declares that:

(a) The willingness of volunteers to offer their services has been increasingly deterred by a perception that they put personal assets at risk in the event of tort actions seeking damages arising from their activities as volunteers;

(b) The contributions of programs, activities, and services to communities is diminished and worthwhile programs, activities, and services are deterred by the unwillingness of volunteers to serve as volunteers of nonprofit public and private organizations;

(c) It is in the public interest to strike a balance between the right of a person to seek redress for injury and the right of an individual to freely give time and energy without compensation as a volunteer in service to the community without fear of personal liability for acts undertaken in good faith absent willful and wanton conduct on the part of the volunteer; and

(d) The provisions of this section are intended to encourage volunteers to contribute their services for the good of their communities and at the same time provide a reasonable basis for redress of claims which may arise relating to those services.

(3) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:

(a) "Nonprofit corporation" means any corporation which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 501(a) of the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 501(a), as amended, or which is listed as an exempt organization in section 501(c) of the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 501(c), as amended. The term includes a not-for-profit corporation.

(b) "Nonprofit organization" means any organization which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 501(a) of the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 501(a), as amended, or which is listed as an exempt organization in section 501(c) of the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 501(c), as amended, and any homeowners association, as defined in and which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 528 of the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 528.

(c) (I) "Volunteer" means a person performing services for a nonprofit organization, a nonprofit corporation, a governmental entity, or a hospital without compensation, other than reimbursement for actual expenses incurred. The term excludes a volunteer serving as a director, officer, or trustee who shall be protected from civil liability in accordance with the provisions of sections 13-21-116 and 13-21-115.7.

Reading this thread reminds me of why I prefer hiking in groups no larger than four.

An outfitter is not a volunteer, even if they do not charge for the trip. They are a buisness and the trip, even if free, is promoting their business. This really puts them in a different category.

Each state has different regulations. If you lead trips, it is wise to look them up and see how to protect yourself. The CMC had a lawyer set up the waivers and sign-in, sign out system. California is pretty litigatious. Another interseting thing- the lawyer suggested that the club NOT get insurance, buecause insurance begs suit.

I was not trying to make anyone feel guilty. Most people who have not lead lots of groups are not aware of the difficulty. Casual is fine when everything is going well. It is when the unexpected hits that chaos can explode and strong leadership and good "followership" is needed. I AM am bias towards strong leadership having instructed for the National Outdoor Leadership School for seven years. Teaching how to lead groups in the wilderness was our mission!

Don't worry about it - "guilty" wasn't the right word, I think. "You made me feel a bit thoughtless" might come closer to the mark, or perhaps "embarrassed." I was having a good time, luxuriating in not being the leader for once, and didn't really think much, if at all, about my responsibility to the group as a whole, even if that responsibility was just to be a good follower.

Again, I really appreciated your post - it covered a lot of ground very incisively.

I agree that commercial is different than volunteer. My post was meant to give some comfort to volunteers.



Yes, the best defense is to be bare and judgement proof. IMHO joint and several liability is an evil pushed on to the innocents to make sure lawyers can make a living.



Professional judgement and "one size fits all" rules are not compatible. Unit cohesion is important in the military and at other times. But splitting a group is not the end of the world. I have a Grand Canyon permit for six in May. After two nights two guys are going to walk to the rim and the other four of us will continue on the permit. Good planning may mean having a plan to split the group.

A couple of guys traveling with John Wesley Powell tried walking to the rim and look what happened (They were killed by Paiutes). Bad historical precedent. Of course, the NPS doesn't let that happen these days.

Switching passengers on river trips is a common practice. Commercials are required to provide an escort, but privates are not.

Did they establish for sure that happened to Powell's defectors. I thought that was still a mystery.

Glenn, I led hikes (and canoe trips) for the Wilmington, DE Trail Club in the 1960s. The club had an expectation that hikers stayed with the group (including starting together in the morning), unless there was some sort of emergency, in which case, somebody went with whomever was going out. Beyond safety and liability, there was also the question of shuttle arrangements. And yes, as far back as that, we were advised not to have insurance, since it invited suits. Going on a hike was considered "an assumed risk". Best, jcp

Well Glen, the only groups I go in is with scouts. Then I am in charge and we start off together.

Whoa?!?!?!? Advise someone to NOT carry insurance? That means if someone successfully sues the "store" for neg. in organizing the trip, the Plaintiff just got themselves a store! Does the store owner really want to jeopardize ownership of the store (not to mention their personal residence, boat, and car)?? Many lawsuits are settled for the amount of insurance coverage, meaning even if the Plaintiff can establish damages in excess of, say, $100k, the Plaintiff will settle for the $100k. But at least the store owner gets to KEEP the store.

I think the advise to the CMC not to carry insurance was because as a "club" it really has no assets. As an individual, if you have assets, insurance is a good idea! This particular thing really made me think about leading trips. If the club is not insured and has no assets, then the leader(s) are next in line to get sued. I really did not like that idea - go to all the trouble of planning trips (believe me it is a lot of trouble),pretty much be a free guide (I had a climbing partner so I did not need to round of people to climb with), and then also take on the personal liability. Whether you win or loose a suit, it is painful, stressful and even if you do not owe money, your reputation could be seriously tarnished. And this is not that chance in a million thing either. A past climbing partner of mine was sued. They were just buddies out climbing. They mutually decided to descend the U-notch unroped. They became separated when his partner stopped on a rock for a rest and then fell and died. The family sued. The entire mess went on for ten years.

I think this state of affairs is a major reason there are no longer a lot of organized climbing clubs anymore. I honestly think given a good enough lawyer, anyone could be charged with neglegence.

Get OJ's lawyers. He had a pretty good life, until he did another really stupid thing. There are lawyers that specialize in "asset protection". Most large corporations are self insured and have no insurance. 60% of people that have health benefits through their employer are not insured. The benefits are self insured.

Two types of people do not need insurance. Those that have a lot of money :)and those that have none.

Oh my aching head! Is it any wonder many of us hike solo? I wish this was an April Fool's thread, but that is clearly not the case....

I have heard another saying. There are two types of liesure class: those with enough money to buy time and those with no money and lots of free time. The rich and the bums.

Glenn, your heart is in the right place. There are few people I feel truly comfortable with on a backpacking trip (trail or off trail). (I might have to sign up for one of W_D's group trips...InCoGnIto Of Course). I usually feel I need to keep an eye on everyone...and I am very hands off. I don't like people bugging me and vise versa. But I can just tell when things are not going to go smooth. Smaller groups are generally much less stressful.