Backcountry Forum
Backpacking & Hiking Gear

Backcountry Forum
Our long-time Sponsor - the leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear
 
 
 

Amazon.com
Backpacking Forums
---- Our Gear Store ----
The Lightweight Gear Store
 
 WINTER CAMPING 

Shelters
Bivy Bags
Sleeping Bags
Sleeping Pads
Snow Sports
Winter Kitchen

 SNOWSPORTS 

Snowshoes
Avalanche Gear
Skins
Hats, Gloves, & Gaiters
Accessories

 ULTRA-LIGHT 

Ultralight Backpacks
Ultralight Bivy Sacks
Ultralight Shelters
Ultralight Tarps
Ultralight Tents
Ultralight Raingear
Ultralight Stoves & Cookware
Ultralight Down Sleeping Bags
Ultralight Synthetic Sleep Bags
Ultralight Apparel


the Titanium Page
WM Extremelite Sleeping Bags

 CAMPING & HIKING 

Backpacks
Tents
Sleeping Bags
Hydration
Kitchen
Accessories

 CLIMBING 

Ropes & Cordage
Protection & Hardware
Carabiners & Quickdraws
Climbing Packs & Bags
Big Wall
Rescue & Industrial

 MEN'S APPAREL 

Jackets
Shirts
Baselayer
Headwear
Gloves
Accessories

 WOMEN'S APPAREL 

Jackets
Shirts
Baselayer
Headwear
Gloves
Accessories

 FOOTWEAR 

Men's Footwear
Women's Footwear

 CLEARANCE 

Backpacks
Mens Apparel
Womens Apparel
Climbing
Footwear
Accessories

 BRANDS 

Black Diamond
Granite Gear
La Sportiva
Osprey
Smartwool

 WAYS TO SHOP 

Sale
Clearance
Top Brands
All Brands

 Backpacking Equipment 

Shelters
BackPacks
Sleeping Bags
Water Treatment
Kitchen
Hydration
Climbing


 Backcountry Gear Clearance

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#162130 - 02/13/12 09:13 PM Defining Thru-hiking
Barefoot Friar Offline
member

Registered: 01/23/09
Posts: 176
Loc: Houston, Alabama
What defines a "thru-hike"?

Is it walking past all of the blazes, never skipping or bypassing any?

Is it walking continuously from one end to the other (I.E., not flip-flopping)?

Is it following the general "gist" of the trail, but changing routes slightly (such as following another, nearby trail for a distance before returning to the main trail)? By this I mean following the general trail corridor but perhaps not the footbed itself so religiously?

I've read that purists deem that anyone "blue-blazing" the AT hasn't actually hiked the AT; one must hike by every white blaze within a calendar year. I've read that folks on the PCT or CDT are a bit more relaxed about that. Is it true?

What are your thoughts, and why?
_________________________
"Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; then you will find rest for your souls."

Top
#162132 - 02/13/12 09:48 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
aimless Online   content
Moderator

Registered: 02/05/03
Posts: 3292
Loc: Portland, OR
What defines a "thru-hike"?

A better question might be: who defines a thru-hike?

There is no organization that rules on these things, so there is going to be a touch of anarchy about the whole enterprise. Which, considering the activity and who does it, seems to me only apt.

If the "who" is me, then I would allow that anyone who walks from the starting point to the end point, by whatever route, should be able to consider themselves a thru-hiker. Most large-scale human endeavors have an amount of uncertainty and "slop" connected to how they are finally accomplished. A few miles dropped out for sane reasons shouldn't negate the whole of the accomplishment.

As Napolean's right hand general (Ney) said, the first casualty of any battle is the battle plan. Getting all "purist" about who is a thru-hiker is most often about raising yourself in your own eyes by denigrating someone else. Why one path (white blazes) is real and the other (blue blazes) is not real has nothing to do with hiking and everything to do with mind games.

btw, I'm a westerner who's hiked maybe 15% of the PCT overall. I've never set foot on the AT.

Top
#162139 - 02/14/12 06:45 AM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: aimless]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
"The first casualty of any battle is the battle plan."

About 50 years ago, when I was a kid, a tornado hit our town. Our emergency planning, such as it was back then, relied heavily on the police and fire departments, which were housed in the cityy building.

You guessed it: the tornado made a direct hit on the city building, eliminating radio communication and dropping the top two stories onto all three of the fire trucks.

Top
#162140 - 02/14/12 08:01 AM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Glenn]
Gershon Offline
member

Registered: 07/08/11
Posts: 1110
Loc: Colorado
To me, the only one who needs to white blaze a trail is someone trying to set a speed record.

For myself, I would have to come pretty close to whiteblazing. For instance, this year, many missed parts of the Appalacian Trail. It was closed due to hurricanes. I personally would not call myself a thru-hiker in this case, but I have no problem with those who do.

I'm more interested in hearing about a person's experience than knowing if they touched every white blaze. I think the last is pretty close to impossible anyway. Most everyone is probably a little pregnant this way.

_________________________
http://48statehike.blogspot.com/

Top
#162141 - 02/14/12 08:29 AM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Gershon]
oldranger Offline
member

Registered: 02/23/07
Posts: 1735
Loc: California (southern)
The great thing about hiking, climbing, etc. is that they are individual experiences. Following someone else's arbitrary rules is not my idea of fun.

Top
#162148 - 02/14/12 12:10 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
BrianLe Offline
member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 1149
Loc: Washington State, King County
Aplogies in advance for a long post; this topic can generate real passion, so I've used a lot of words in hopes of not being misunderstood ...
Note also that in the below I only claim to speak for myself (!).

My sense is that few who have done a lot of long distance hiking fall into the "purist" camp. As it turned out, I was a pretty straight-forward white-blazer on the AT, just because I rarely saw the point of taking alternate routes on that trail --- in big contrast to the CDT.

Quote:

"I've read that folks on the PCT or CDT are a bit more relaxed about that. Is it true?"

Yes.

The PCT, like the AT, is one unambiguous trail that a person can start at one end of and walk to the other end of, being pretty certainly right on the trail for the vast majority of it. NOBO thru's go through the Sierras in a lot of snow, and so of course cannot walk the precise line (how purist gonzo does a person want to be?). There are not a lot of alternate PCT routes ("blue blaze" sort of thing). The one that comes to mind, however, is one that everyone takes, the Eagle Creek alternate in northern Oregon. If taking the more boring official PCT route there is a requirement then I dare say the vast majority of PCT thru-hikers aren't qualified according to self-appointed purists. Up until recently, the forest service had a designated alternate they told people to take in northern WA --- would a person not qualify as thru-hiking if the official route was just closed for years? (In fact, most thru's walked the closed route anyway, but still, some did take the designated alternate).
All that said, I think what makes thru's on the PCT more relaxed about things is that after walking some hundreds or thousands of miles, most folks will have had the pre-trip purist nonsense knocked out of their heads just by personal experience and from all of their social interactions being with other thru-hikers. And a lot of PCT thru's have already hiked the AT, so overall it's a bit of a more mature/experienced trail culture, especially just starting out on the trail.

I think the more normal approach, at least by folks who have actually done any significant walking, is something along the line of "Start at one end of the trail, walk to the other in the same 12-month period, staying on the official trail where this is even reasonably possible and makes sense". I.e., don't hitch hike around parts, don't take easier routes just because they're easier, etc. To be clear, I definitely would not say that there's perfect consensus among thru-hikers on this stuff, but still --- I've not met any triple crown dyed-in-the-wool purists.

This is a bit of a touchy subject because the reality is that there always seem to be some route trade-offs, and sometimes they feel uncomfortable to the thru-hiker, such that in some cases even they are left questioning their own decision between unhappy trade-offs. On the PCT, a common one is fire closures --- walk through illegally (no thanks ...), hitch-hike around and optionally come back later, or walk around? The choices are difficult. On the AT for me and folks around me, it was snow; I did one walk-around where there was butt-deep snow and no one was making it through (I had an early start). On the PCT I hitched around multiple fire closures, but did go back to pick up the missing pieces; this was something I chose to do, and I don't presume to judge those that for whatever reason did not or could not (!). The CDT is just a mass of alternates, one that a recently-defunct group (CDTA) tried to codify into one official route --- but it's a bit more of a "wild west" do-your-own thing approach in reality. Some routes that most thru-hikers walk aren't the so-called CDTA "official" route, and the most commonly used maps (Ley) show a host of alternatives (so-called purple routes, similar in concept to blue blazes).

To get recognition by PCT and AT groups for a thru-hike, the thru-hiker signs a statement of what s/he did, and gets in return a little paper certificate (well, now also a big honking medal for the PCT). You can view these statements online if you're curious, pcta.org and I think aldha (not at all the same organization as aldha-west, go figure). They're less restrictive than the more, typically AT-oriented purist mind set would suggest. Even less restrictive is what a person signs for the triple crown award.

Certainly flip-flopping is not against the rules (unless of course you set it as a personal rule for your own hike --- for example, until the CDT, I had a rule to never slack pack, gave it up a couple of times on the CDT when specific conditions made it just silly).

I think that the strongest sense, the one perhaps with the most consensus, is that a person walks an unbroken line, so that if you hitch into town to resupply, you get back to where you left the trail to continue hiking from there. The idea that a person would do so while literally never missing an inch of the "official trail" is IMO an imaginative exercise by armchair purists.

Now, another question is on what trails is it reasonable to use the term "thru-hiking". When I first heard folks talking about thru-hiking the JMT, my very parochial and initial reaction was "But it's just 300 miles or so". Back in more normal life, it seems now completely normal and reasonable to me to use the term for the JMT or the CT or the LT or a number of other trails measured in hundreds rather than thousands of miles. Really, if I walk a 20-mile trail from one end to the other I could say that I "thru-hiked it". But I would feel a bit silly in doing so! :-)
_________________________
Brian Lewis
http://postholer.com/brianle

Top
#162153 - 02/14/12 01:02 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: BrianLe]
Barefoot Friar Offline
member

Registered: 01/23/09
Posts: 176
Loc: Houston, Alabama
Good answers. smile

Brian, I see your point about "thru-hiking" a very short trail. I know many consider a 20-mile trail to be a dayhike.

For my own personal definitions, I'd "thru-hike" a trail that took me 3 days or more. But that's just my own thought process.

I have to go back to work; more to come.
_________________________
"Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; then you will find rest for your souls."

Top
#162161 - 02/14/12 03:16 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
wandering_daisy Offline
member

Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 2865
Loc: California
There are many different "flavors" of thru-hiking, each with its own trade-offs. It depends on what kind of an experience you want. I do not think there is a "right" or "wrong" just an "appropriate for your goals". Regardless of how you choose, I do think we all have to be honest about what we did. If a designation has certain "requirements" and I do not do all of them, then I cannot claim to have that particular designation. A defined thru-hike in its purest form, is an accomplishment, but doing variations is just a different accomplishment. Most of the PCT journals I read last year were very honest about what they were doing.

So here is another question. Does a through-hike have to be on a designated trail with a starting point "A" and ending point "B"? What about 2 months of wandering up the spine of a mountain range?

Is hiking over roads across the country, continously, yet slopping over into two years, a thru-hike?

I plan to do a thru-hike of sorts this summer- 35 days through the Wind River Mountains, 95% off trail, packer resupplies so that I never come out to civilization until finished. I doubt there are any PCT, CDT or ACT hikers who have gone 35 days away from any form of civilization. Does not make my trip any better or worse- just a different experience. I am going to plod along at about 6 miles a day, not near like the 25 miles a day trail through-hikers do.

I am not sure the "name" assigned has much to do with the experience. If one does the PCT in three seasons, one state at a time they still have the experience, even though they do not have the "thru-hike" label. However, if the athletic accomplishment of doing the entire trail on one season is what motivates you and is important to you, then by all means go for it. It IS a unique accomplishment.

And I do agree with BrianLee-- most fanatical "purists" are armchair athletes. What are you going to do- walk right through a forest fire and die a purist?

Top
#162163 - 02/14/12 03:34 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: BrianLe]
BZH Offline
member

Registered: 01/26/11
Posts: 1189
Loc: Madison, AL
I was confused when I saw the title. I always considered a thru-hike, a hike where the beginning and end points do not coincide and in contrast a loop hike is where you end at the same point you started at.

I never gave it much thought as to how far you have to go. I guess if I ever actually did a "real" thru-hike I wouldn't want my experience watered down by someone claiming to be a "thru-hiker" when he got a lift home from the gas station because he happened to meet a buddy their while out on a walk.

What should people call a short hike where you get picked up on the other side of the trail?

Top
#162164 - 02/14/12 03:46 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
skcreidc Offline
member

Registered: 08/16/10
Posts: 1590
Loc: San Diego CA
I was blissfully ignorant until I found this topic. I had always assumed that it suggested doing one of the "big three", but really had no idea.

Web definition

"Thru-hiking is the process of hiking a long-distance trail from end to end. The term is most commonly associated with the Appalachian Trail, but is also used for other lengthy trails and long distance hikes, including the Pacific Crest Trail and the Continental Divide Trail."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thru-hike

Also included is hiking the Appalachian Trail end to end within one years time.

So I'm assuming that the white blaze and blue blaze terminology also comes from the Appalachian Trail?

And Brian, what is "slack pack"?

It seems reasonable to me, given the effort logistical and otherwise that needs be done to complete one or more of the "big three", to give it a special name such as "thru hike". It is a jump in the level of commitment needed compared to other backpacks. I have done the JMT a few times and have never considered it a thru-hike, although this is probably because I never gave the terminology of what I was doing much thought. Basically I was there to enjoy without analysis.

Top
#162168 - 02/14/12 04:10 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: skcreidc]
aimless Online   content
Moderator

Registered: 02/05/03
Posts: 3292
Loc: Portland, OR
what is "slack pack"?

BrianLe may give you a better answer, but my understanding is that "slack packing" consists of arranging matters so that you are not carrying all the necessary equipment to camp overnight as you hike, even though your hike is longer than one day. You can do this by having someone else haul your equipment and meet you at the end of the day, or by emerging from the trail at day's end and staying in a town, then continuing back on the trail the next morning.

Top
#162169 - 02/14/12 04:11 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: skcreidc]
Barefoot Friar Offline
member

Registered: 01/23/09
Posts: 176
Loc: Houston, Alabama
Originally Posted By skcreidc
So I'm assuming that the white blaze and blue blaze terminology also comes from the Appalachian Trail?


Yes. The "official" AT is marked with white blazes, and other, nearby trails are often (always?) marked with blue ones. Blue blazing the AT might include taking the BMT from Springer through GSMNP. Or something like that. Since the AT has been re-routed over the years, one could conceivably hike the trails that used to be the official route but are no longer.

But I don't know firsthand because I've never been through there. I got all this online.
_________________________
"Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; then you will find rest for your souls."

Top
#162171 - 02/14/12 04:24 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
Barefoot Friar Offline
member

Registered: 01/23/09
Posts: 176
Loc: Houston, Alabama
This is all very interesting to me. I think it illustrates, among other things, that we are a very diverse group of folks. The fact that there seem to be many definitions to the term isn't bad. It does suggest that self-definition may sometimes be in order, though, since we all seem to have a slightly different approach to the concept.
_________________________
"Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; then you will find rest for your souls."

Top
#162173 - 02/14/12 05:13 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
DTape Offline
member

Registered: 11/23/07
Posts: 666
Loc: Upstate NY
If my memory serves me correctly, the only "definition" truly used by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy is "2000 miler". someone who has hiked the entire trail. They do not make a distinction between those who section hike, those who walk the entire 2000+ miles with vehicle support, those who complete it in a year and stay in hotels every 5 or so days, those who hike half of it and then take a 3 month break and complete the other half within the same calendar year, etc...

I have heard some say all 2000 milers are section hikers, it is just a matter of how you connect each section and how long you are away from the trail between those sections. I agree with others, that you hike for your own reasons, and your own definition is what matters to you.
_________________________
http://ducttapeadk.blogspot.com

Top
#162175 - 02/14/12 05:22 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: DTape]
oldranger Offline
member

Registered: 02/23/07
Posts: 1735
Loc: California (southern)
No! No! Obviously, with all the controversy this subject is generating, the only solution is all encompassing government control and regulation to enforce fair and objective standards and prohibit false claims and all other sleazy activities.

Let's start off with a name - How about "Government Regulation of all Endeavors on the Appalachian Trail" or GREAT. I think we could do this for a paltry 50 million or so per year (and it would create jobs!) I'll volunteer to be the first agency head.....


(Just to remove any lingering doubts, I am trying to be sarcastic, in the unlikely event that anyone takes the above seriously.....)

Top
#162176 - 02/14/12 05:31 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: oldranger]
skcreidc Offline
member

Registered: 08/16/10
Posts: 1590
Loc: San Diego CA
That is "great" old ranger, in a scary sort of way. It may be a little too realistic for comfort. You have heard of the Navy CLEAN program, haven't you? grin

Btw, that definition of slack packing sounds like hut to hut in the alps! I'll be slacking all the way! (and loving it! Said in my best Don Adams voice)


Edited by skcreidc (02/14/12 05:35 PM)

Top
#162177 - 02/14/12 05:34 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
lori Offline
member

Registered: 01/22/08
Posts: 2801
I'd go by the general stance that "through" means straight through a route without looping back.

Whether you do that in a leisurely fashion, stick to the set route religiously or do a bunch of side trips is immaterial. It's not a loop, not a lollipop, not returning on foot to the car, it's a thru-hike.

I'm building my own thru-hikes. Will be dropped off and picked up on either end due to the remoteness of the trailheads involved.
_________________________
"In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities. In the expert's mind there are few." Shunryu Suzuki

http://hikeandbackpack.com

Top
#162183 - 02/14/12 07:36 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
Swimswithtrout Offline
member

Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 48
Loc: Colorado
What's a blaze anyway ?? The only one I know is from an illegal campfire run amuck. (j/k)

It's funny how wrapped up people get about an urban "hut to hut" hike like the AT.

I've done plenty of "thru hikes" in the Rockies, from one end of a recognized Range to the other. Most were strictly off trail and above timberline, so I guess they can't count



"If You Name It, They Will Come"......


Edited by Swimswithtrout (02/14/12 07:48 PM)
_________________________
Want to see the Wind's ?

Top
#162208 - 02/15/12 10:09 AM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Barefoot Friar]
finallyME Offline
member

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 2710
Loc: Utah
Well, I will tell you my definition. And since my definition is the only one that counts and the only correct one..... wink

A thru-hike is a hike that starts and stops at different locations. I did a thru-hike this last summer with my scouts. We were dropped off at one end, hiked 15 miles in two nights, and were picked up at the other end.

There are three main types of "hikes". A thru-hike, a loop-hike, and an out-an-back. A lollipop is a loop and an out-an-back. A "section hike" is a thru-hike, but the participant has a much larger goal in mind and just cuts it up into pieces.


Edited by finallyME (02/15/12 10:09 AM)
_________________________
I've taken a vow of poverty. To annoy me, send money.

Top
#162211 - 02/15/12 10:40 AM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: finallyME]
wandering_daisy Offline
member

Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 2865
Loc: California
finallyME- what you describe is what I call a "point-to-point" or "one-way". With the emphasis lately on long hikes, the term thru-hike has evolved into a term that has implies a longer stretch, an entire named trail, that is done in its entirety in one time period with no major breaks. I will add another term- a "figure-8". This is a twisted loop, for we of twisted minds. I like the figure-8 method because I plan on coming back to one point about half way through the trip, so can stash some food (appropriately bear-proofed) and lighten my pack.

Part of the thru-hike is the complex logistics of resupply that have to be considered. A one-ration point-to-point does not have this component.

I have found there is a REAL difference once you are out for more than one ration period. Mentally, you really are in a different place. When I taught at NOLS I found a real mind-change in the students after two weeks. Talk of town and hambergers became less and they were finially getting into living in the moment, the wilderness their home. They focused less on what day it was. I do not know if there even is a term for an extended trip where you do not go back to town- rather have supplies brought in to you.

I am not sure thru-hikers even experience this. Resupplying every few days and many stops in civilization seem to occupy the minds of a lot of thru-hikers, at least, from what they write in their journals. (That is why I really liked BrianLee's journals because he does not do that).

Again it is not a matter of right, wrong, better or what. Each method results in different experiences, different rewards.

Top
#162232 - 02/15/12 02:41 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: oldranger]
Steadman Offline
member

Registered: 09/17/09
Posts: 514
Loc: Virginia
Can I be the Deputy, or replace you after I retire from my current job?

We need to discuss fee and permit structure. smile

Top
#162249 - 02/15/12 04:40 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: Steadman]
OregonMouse Online   content
member

Registered: 02/03/06
Posts: 6799
Loc: Gateway to Columbia Gorge
I always understood that a thru-hike (note spelling!) is a hike from one end of a really long trail (at least 100 miles) to the other. Of course living close to the PCT I tend to think of the Triple Crown trails, but there is a longer one (American Discovery Trail) and lots and lots of shorter ones, some under 100 miles. There are even more trails planned, but many of those are still mostly in the wishful thinking stage.

While a thru-hike is usually considered completing the trail in a single year, you can get full credit for completing a trail--even the Triple Crown trails--by section hiking. It just takes longer!

I've never heard anyone describe the Wonderland Trail around Mt. Rainier (almost 100 miles) as a thru-hike. Is that because it's a circle? Or is it a product of the PCT's being so close?

For me, with my 5-6 mile per day pace, there's no way I'm going to thru-hike anything! Plus I much prefer the enjoy-the-view, stop-and-smell-the-flowers approach to hiking. That doesn't mean I don't admire and respect thru-hikers, though! It's just a different life style.


Edited by OregonMouse (02/15/12 04:41 PM)
_________________________
May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view--E. Abbey

Top
#162275 - 02/15/12 08:46 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: wandering_daisy]
BrianLe Offline
member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 1149
Loc: Washington State, King County
Quote:
"I am not sure thru-hikers even experience this. Resupplying every few days and many stops in civilization seem to occupy the minds of a lot of thru-hikers, at least, from what they write in their journals."


Agreed on all counts (and I certainly look forward to going into town when I'm on trail too ...). Thru-hikers typically carry a week or less of food at a time (which is more like two weeks of food for a person with a more normal metabolism, FWIW). My longest carries have been eight days. But a person doesn't have to spend a great deal of time at town stops; that's an individual decision, some folks are good at getting "in and out" (and sometimes that's motivated by limited funds).

But I agree that it would be a somewhat yet-different experience just purely staying out for weeks; some would thrive on that, I think that for many it would at best take some getting used to. Probably a bigger factor along this line for the long distance trails is which trail you're hiking on --- I had many more true days of solitude on the CDT than the times I walked alone on either of the PCT or AT.
_________________________
Brian Lewis
http://postholer.com/brianle

Top
#162278 - 02/15/12 08:55 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: aimless]
BrianLe Offline
member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 1149
Loc: Washington State, King County
Slack pack: yup, I meant the definition that aimless gave.

In fact, my recollection is that it's been used to mean a couple of things over time. A perhaps older (?) use of the term is to mean an unhurried and non-goal-oriented manner of hiking. But in thru-hiker circles, I've only heard it to mean "someone else is hauling much of your stuff so you can just walk with a day pack".
_________________________
Brian Lewis
http://postholer.com/brianle

Top
#162279 - 02/15/12 08:57 PM Re: Defining Thru-hiking [Re: wandering_daisy]
oldranger Offline
member

Registered: 02/23/07
Posts: 1735
Loc: California (southern)
Defining thru hiking is probably worthwhile, but I tend to characterize my hikes, both accomplished or potential, in terms of "interesting," "challenging" "really different country", or some similar characteristic. Length is whatever it is.

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Shout Box

Highest Quality Lightweight Down Sleeping Bags
 
Western Mountaineering Sleeping Bags
 
Lite Gear Talk - Featured Topics
Backcountry Discussion - Featured Topics
Make Your Own Gear - Featured Topics
Featured Photos
Spiderco Chaparral Pocketknife
David & Goliath
Also Testing
Trip Report with Photos
Seven Devils, Idaho
Oat Hill Mine Trail 2012
Dark Canyon - Utah
Who's Online
0 registered (), 160 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Noodles, McCrary, DanyBacky, Rashy Willia, WanderBison
13240 Registered Users
Forum Links
Disclaimer
Policies
Site Links
Backpacking.net
Lightweight Gear Store
Backpacking Book Store
Lightweight Zone
Hiking Essentials

Our long-time Sponsor, BackcountryGear.com - The leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear:

Backcountry Forum
 

Affiliate Disclaimer: This forum is an affiliate of BackcountryGear.com, Amazon.com, R.E.I. and others. The product links herein are linked to their sites. If you follow these links to make a purchase, we may get a small commission. This is our only source of support for these forums. Thanks.!
 
 

Since 1996 - the Original Backcountry Forum
Copyright © The Lightweight Backpacker & BackcountryForum