You're right. If I were kidnapped and delivered bound and blindfolded to a featureless wilderness with a compass, a map, and no current location and told to walk home, the goal of getting out might be extraordinarily challenging, especially if I have no navigation skills.

However, if I start at a trailhead, have the USGS 1:24K square(s) that show all the major roads and terrain features around me and a compass, then I have a fighting chance if I've lost my way (if, for instance, I have to run away from the dudes in DELIVERANCE).

Why?

Usually, there are major physical features (like highways, blue lines, ridges, and valleys) that act as barriers/boundaries - and we ought to know what side of those barriers we are on, even if we are down in the trees and can't see those features.

For example, if you are lost and don't know where you are near the AT in Virginia, you ought to walk towards where you think the Blue Ridge Parkway (Runs basically N/S, parallel to and crossing the AT) ought to be. You might be 20+ miles from your truck, but you now have access to the resources to get back to it. Embarrassing, but not lethal.

Yeah, this might not work so well if you don't have any major barriers to work with (note that I didn't say you could see the barrier; you just had to know where it was RELATIVE to the area you were hiking in, and know that you hadn't crossed it since you started). But proper maps and a compass give you an out if you don't lose your head, even if you've failed to stay found. This justifies the guidance to newbies... and the rest of us, in my opinion.

Did my argument hold up to your scrutiny, Jim?

Steadman