[Cdt-l] Fwd: hiking alone?

Thu Dec 2 00:24:55 CST 2010

  Thanks for responding and not deleting my post. I am not young (50 
actually), and have also done many foolish things. But luckily was 
spared to live and learn. I guess my feelings on the subject are that to 
me one of life's little pleasures is that self reliance that you 
experience when hiking alone in remote places. Places where no one else 
may go for weeks or longer. The feeling you get when you watch every 
step, where you stop before looking around. Where you test and and back 
off, leaving the route for another day when conditions improve. In 
Goatman's case he decided to include a SPOT. His choice, and one that 
worked out well. My style of hiking would have left me lonely and 
possibly cold, hungry and in pain. I would still have the contents of my 
pack. Like most of us I do give a plan to a trusted person. There are 
always possible scenarios where severe injury or death is a possibility. 
Those are also a possibility at any time in life, and I believe no more 
likely on the trail than any where else. These are my feelings at this 
time in my life. Feelings which can and do change. I hope this clears up 
how my post may have been perceived, as I see it could easily have come 
off as being flippant. Sorry if I came off that way, and thanks for the 
opportunity to respond. I am more of a live and let live kind of person 
and try my best not to be judgmental.
Cheers,
mtnrat

On 01/12/10 7:03 PM, ks1007 at aol.com wrote:
> I at first deleted your thread mtnrat - even went to a different site 
> but something tugged at me to answer you - I did a lot of foolish 
> things (not saying you're foolish) when I was younger - you think that 
> you are indestructable when younger - I'm not saying that hiking is 
> foolish - I can build my own self reliance right here in my community 
> - so, what would you do in goatmans case? he couldn't move cuz he was 
> in such pain - after having been in a war and worked in a prison it's 
> always nice knowing someone has your back
>
> *el coyote*
> *Keith and Mary*
> *Trail Angels*
> *Deming, NM*
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Staplin <seanstaplin at gmail.com>
> To: ks1007 <ks1007 at aol.com>
> Cc: cdt-l <cdt-l at backcountry.net>
> Sent: Wed, Dec 1, 2010 6:40 pm
> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] hiking alone?
>
> For hiking a partner is not necessary...ever. --it can happen anywhere 
> anytime. I prefer to hike and scramble alone for the reason of self 
> reliance. Something that I feel is in short supply in all facets of 
> life these days. In fact it can be safer to be alone.
> Cheers,
> Mtnrat
>
> On 01/12/10 9:01 AM, ks1007 at aol.com wrote:
>> yes, I'm not a hiker but I feel that I must weigh in on this thread - 
>> I'm sure that hiking alone has its' merits but I think there are 
>> times when a partner is necessary - case in point - "goatman" dan 
>> johnson slips and fractures his ankle and leg in the gila's - he is 
>> the second to last nobo and the last nobo aussie dave isn't taking 
>> that route - goatman was lucky that he had a SPOT with him and that's 
>> what saved his life - if he would of had a partner they could have 
>> gone for help - I know that hikers are doing the trail because of the 
>> solitude and not having to keep a schedule - even though you may not 
>> like it,  when you get to NM the trail angels keep track of you - one 
>> of the other things that may have saved goatman was that he called 
>> julie the night before - if he wasn't there in 3 days from emory pass 
>> we would have discussed what to do which most likely would have been 
>> to call out SAR
>> you never know when something may happen
>>
>> *el coyote*
>> *Keith and Mary*
>> *Trail Angels*
>> *Deming, NM*
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jim and_or Ginny Owen <spiriteagle99 at hotmail.com>
>> To: brianle <brianle at nwlink.com>; cdt-l <cdt-l at backcountry.net>
>> Sent: Tue, Nov 30, 2010 5:17 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Cdt-l] trail partnership: all or nothing?
>>
>> Brian -
>> The main reasons for hiking together are for safety in bear country 
>> or because you just like
>> hiking together or for navigation purposes (4 eyes are better than 2 
>> eyes).  Being joined at the
>> hip is a good idea if you're a married couple or looking for "safety" 
>> in "bear country" or partners
>> who want to hike together, because there are a number of places where 
>> a wrong turn could
>> send you in different directions and leave one or both of you kinda 
>> "floating in never-never land".
>>
>> Note please that hiking "together" in bear country means EXACTLY 
>> that.  It doesn't mean hiking
>> 5 minutes - or even 30 seconds apart.  If you're that far apart, the 
>> bear considers you to be alone.
>> And you are. Smile
>>
>> Truth is that "bear country" generally isn't nearly as dangerous as 
>> most people think.  But I don't
>> try to convince people of that - they have to discover it for 
>> themselves.  Just keep in mind the rules
>> for not irritating (or attracting) the bears and don't get 
>> overconfident.
>>
>> But if you want to hike together sometimes, and apart other times, 
>> I'd suggest hiking out of
>> town together, separating at some point on the trail and then meeting 
>> at the next town. You'd
>> probably want to decide on a specific motel or restaurant for your 
>> rally point in that next town.
>> Our website generally doesn't give that kind of information, but 
>> Yogi's book probably does.
>>
>> You could, of course, hike part of the day together and part alone.  
>> Just don't count on sharing
>> gear or food in that case because then getting separated leaves on of 
>> you a little short of ....
>> something, be it food, water, shelter, fire.....whatever.   Keep in 
>> mind the words to the song -
>> God bless the child who's got his own.
>>
>> Have a great hike,
>> Jim
>>
>> http://www.spiriteaglehome.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > From: brianle at nwlink.com <mailto:brianle at nwlink.com>
>> > To: Cdt-l at backcountry.net <mailto:Cdt-l at backcountry.net>
>> > Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 13:41:29 -0800
>> > Subject: [Cdt-l] trail partnership: all or nothing?
>> >
>> > Consensus is that if you don't want to hike the CDT literally 
>> alone, you
>> > start with one or more partners and you stay close together the 
>> whole time.
>> > I like the fellow that I plan to hike with a lot, but I've also quite
>> > enjoyed weeks of hiking alone on both PCT and AT, and even when 
>> hiking with
>> > one or more partners I've often hiked much of a given day alone, 
>> joining
>> > back up at lunch and at night. I realize that the CDT is different 
>> in this
>> > way, that you have to stay close to stay together at all, but the 
>> idea of
>> > being joined at the hip to anyone for months of hiking concerns me 
>> a little.
>> >
>> > What I've not seen anyone suggest is the idea of periodically 
>> splitting up
>> > for a while and agreeing to meet back up at or near a particular 
>> trail town.
>> > This seems like it would be a good compromise on the CDT to me, 
>> i.e., have a
>> > trail partnership, but have some significant "alone time" stretches. I
>> > suspect that both of us would appreciate some time apart, and enjoy 
>> each
>> > other's company that much more when we reconnected.
>> >
>> > The only downside I can see would be if one person ended up waiting 
>> quite a
>> > while for the other, and perhaps not being 100% certain that (for 
>> whatever
>> > reason) they're actually going to show up. I suppose another 
>> downside is
>> > the risk that, for whatever reason, the designated reunion spot 
>> wouldn't be
>> > a good/pleasant/safe/whatever place to hang out for the needed 
>> amount of
>> > time. Have any past CDT thru-hikers tried this approach ("meet you at
>> > this particular motel in a week or so"), and any observations if so?
>> >
>> > TIA ---
>> >
>> >
>> > Brian Lewis / Gadget
>> > http://www.postholer.com/brianle
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Cdt-l mailing list
>> > Cdt-l at backcountry.net <mailto:Cdt-l at backcountry.net>
>> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cdt-l mailing list
>> Cdt-l at backcountry.net  <mailto:Cdt-l at backcountry.net>
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cdt-l mailing list
>> Cdt-l at backcountry.net
>> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cdt-l mailing list
> Cdt-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20101201/59945c84/attachment.html 