Hiking America’s three longest trails in less than a year. What could go wrong? | Hacker News Reader

Hiking America’s three longest trails in less than a year. What could go wrong?

latimes.com

124 pointshodgesrm84 comments

There's so much bad policy in the USA that sucks, especially when compared to some European countries, but one thing the USA has done relatively well at is creating lots of public land and the creating these trails.

I hiked a section of the PCT starting at a paved road (mile 652 of the trail) and didn't cross another paved road until 290 miles of hiking later. I tear up with gratitude for the vision of the people who worked to protect the land and create the trail.

Also, sure, there is awesome gorgeous hiking in Europe too of course, but, say, in the Alps, mostly it's managed more tightly. You can't just hike for the day and set up a tent where you get tired. Camping is much more restricted to right next to the huts/refuges or not allowed at all.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Trails_System

Yep, hiking in the alps is largely a hut-to-hut sort of affair. It's picture perfect, jaw droppingly so, but it is crowded, tamed and sterile. Goats are about the wildest thing you see.

Only if you do few most touristic places in whole range of alps. Most of it is quiet and you will meet few people a day. But sure if you pick one of the most popular hikes in alps then its surprisingly crowded, especially in the summer. Autumn is far superior time for Alps hiking (colors, temperatures, weather).

Also don't get that camping restrictions rant in this thread - you can camp literally everywhere outside of natural reserve. If its private property and you have somebody to ask then ask for permission. Otherwise be polite, quiet, don't leave anything after you and that's it.

I've been doing it for last 10 years almost every weekend weather permitting, never any issue. Outside of proper alpinism / skialpinism never used huts.

You can do it and get away with it, however it is absolutely forbidden in central europe, except Switzerland... biwaking is only allowed in emergency situations. If you are caught you might have to pay high fines...

You will never be "caught" unless you camp somewhere inappropriate or make a mess

Part of the reason for restrictions is because the popularity of the area overwhelms the natural area and causes too much human impact, thus restrictions get put in place so the area can be protected.

I for one would love to see more permitting used in the white mountains.

Yes, I should make it clear that the freedom on the PCT, in the Sierra, is limited to people who have a permit. You can't just show up and camp overnight; you need to get a permit in advance and the quantity of permits is limited to protect the area and the experience.

I don't know the White Mountains but here's a place that I've been that is going to start requiring permits: https://aspenjournalism.org/maroon-bells-snowmass-wilderness.... I was there in 2018. I remember hiking out on a Friday, about a two hour hike, and passing maybe 150 backpackers hiking in to camp overnight during those two hours.

Europe is far more free than the US for a lot of this, no permits required, right to roam in many countries, and camping is tolerated most places it isn’t a nuisance.

Europe is rather diverse regarding those rights.

In France you cannot do wild camping at all, bivouacking is merely tolerated. In some trails, you can only set up camp in designated spot.

... in theory, in some places, maybe.

If you go to the mountains actually, you will see tons of folks camping around all the time, nobody has any issue with it. The only exception are proper natural parks, but that's understandable.

"but that's understandable" - Except it's the opposite of the USA. No right to camp on private land, but usually allowed on public land. There are a lot of different types of public land in the USA. Not just National Parks, but also National Forest ("forest", a misnomer, because that can include treeless mountain areas, deserts), BLM land. For most National Forst and BLM land, camp anywhere. For National Parks, some places you have to camp in designated campgrounds, but many huge areas where the rule is camp anywhere.

I'm saying, the management of public land in the USA is DIFFERENT. Even different than Canada.

There's where you can WALK and where you can CAMP. I'm talking about where you can CAMP. The only countries in Western Europe where there's a lot of freedom to camp are Scotland, Norway, and Sweden.

In the Alps, where there is the most dramatic scenario, in France, Switzerland, Italy, Austria, there aren't a lot of areas where you can just pick a spot and camp there.

You don't need a permit to stay in a hut/refuge, but you usually need a reservation, which is sorta the same thing, a limit to the number of overnight visitors. Effectively a permit.

There are very very very few places in the USA where you need a permit to just hike for the day. Places where they are required are either very vulnerable like "The Wave" in Utah or dangerous when overcrowded like Angels Landing in Zion.

> The only countries in Western Europe where there's a lot of freedom to camp are Scotland, Norway, and Sweden.

If Sweden counts as Western Europe, we might as well add Finland to this list too.

Besides a few exceptions (military bases, the border zone, a few protected natural parks) you have an absolute right to camp anywhere as long as you don’t cause more than minor harm to the landowner.

Just learned about the Right to Roam in the UK a couple of years back, and planning on putting it to good use during a bike tour next year. Do you know of any resources that do a good job of comparing “right to roam” equivalents throughout Europe and/or the world?

Everyman's right/right to roam only applies in Scotland (see https://www.mygov.scot/scottish-outdoor-access-code for details). There are more limited rights in a few places in England, such as Dartmoor. Elsewhere, access to private land without permission is trespass: if the landowner asks you to leave, you must leave.

This is an awesome resource https://transeurotrail.org/

Wonderful bike trail, has realistic information on where you can camp for each country.

In the Eastern Europe, in the Carpathian mountains, you can camp almost anywhere on public land and, with the owner's permission, on private land. At least in Romania I never had trouble camping and in the past several campers put their tent in my grandma's yard when I was a kid (it is a mountain region up north). The only problem camping in the wild in Romania is the big number of beasts that can kill you: bears, boars, wolves.

In the Balkans people camp regularly on the side of the road on public lands. I have friends that did it in almost every country in the region on motorcycle tours, so they were camping quite close to roads.

It is possible in Skandinavia, most of Swizzerland and Scottland. Unfortunately nowhere else in the center of europe.

Long time lurker. Seeing this on hacker news surprised me. I'm a triple crowner myself, though not single calendar year. It's impressive. Those trails are a crazy ride! - Lunchbox

In 2019 when I was 63 I did a 500 snippet of the Pacific Crest Trail. Because of needing to resupply, my long hike was really a series of 9 trips, each individual trip lasting about 5 days, more or less, like a work week. I started to think of a day hiking as "a day at the office". Already on "Monday", my first day back on trail I would be thinking about "Friday", the day I could get to town and eat restaurant food instead of the food in my pack that I was tired of.

I don't know how these guys and other long distance hikers maintain their motivation, or rather, I don't know how they continue to find enough reward in the activity to make up for the deprivation, repetition.

How did you find doing it at that age? I’d love to do the PCT but can’t see how I’ll manage the time before my 60s

Anecdotally the biggest factor for that, barring any acute health issue, will be your activity level between now and then.

I'm 65, retired. I'm more physically prepared now than when I was younger and busy with work and kids. I have time and money now. I see plenty of other backpackers in their mid 60s, but hardly any backpackers in their 70s. I've been doing a lot of backpacking in recent years because I know my time is running out.

I just got back from 11 days hiking in the Grand Canyon. My left knee hurts, so maybe time is running out...

> or rather, I don't know how they continue to find enough reward in the activity to make up for the deprivation, repetition.

I totally feel you on this. I’ve done a reasonable amount of backpacking, and more and more, I’m not sure if I like backpacking or like looking back and saying I’ve done it. I certainly feel a sense of accomplishment from the treks I’ve done, but in the moment, it often just feels like drudgery, shading into misery when the days get long and the trail gets hard.

The exception is when the natural beauty of the surrounding area is high enough, the whole experience is totally worthwhile. The American west (Tetons, Sierra Nevada) still does it for me, but the AT definitely does not.

I have the same problem if I go hiking with a destination in mind. 7 years ago while touring Europe with some friends I learned to totally ignore the destination of the day, just go in some direction and look in the evening for a place to slip. That make it all about the journey, not the destination, and it is so much relaxing and fun.

I like bicycle touring for the reasons you listed. Bike tours are physically just as hard, but you tend to run into decent food and drink more often. There's no shortage of nice camping.

Andrew Skurka has done several millennium-mile trips in the US and Alaska. He has resupplied exclusively through US Postal general delivery. He prepares his high calorie 4-5 packets before the trip and has Mom mail them in timely sequence. He says he hadnt had a failure yet.

A 60-something may have the advantage of requiring less food weight than a young man because metabolism has slowed down. I have certainly noticed this when backpacking with much young college students. I eat like a sparrow; them like hogs.

If you follow ultra-light hiking gurus like Andrew Skurka, food can be 75% of your pack weight after a resupply- 9 lbs base weight and 25 lbs food.

Most people fail to realize how incredibly difficult walking even one whole trail could be. These folks did all 3 in 295 days. ~7500 miles (a lot of those with unforgiving terrain esp. C.D one) within a calendar year. That's quite an achievement.

Not gonna lie, I have a warm fuzzy feeling for them topped by a tinge of wonder (+ envy) at this achievement! - jester

This is a quote from the book "The Motion of the Body through Space" by Lionel Shriver. It's about exercise, but it applies to hiking ambition too.

"People who exercise less than you are pathetic; people who exercise more than you are nuts.”

“Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?”

— Carlin

Do the people doing thirty over really see it that way?

People who do a single-year triple crown are nuts because you can't take the time to enjoy it at the sort of pace that is required. Head down, dash for the objective is not how to enjoy nature!

I finished the A.T. in October after 174 days, by far the hardest thing I've ever done in my life. I can't imagine trying to do a whole triple crown in a single year. Hats off to these two!

- Bear Bait

What is Bear Bait

It's the person's "trail name": https://www.atmuseum.org/trail-names.html

Correct. I can't speak for bear bait, but you get a name or give yourself a name on trail. A right of passage of sorts. I'm Lunchbox because of a chest pack I wore on the PCT. There are people on trail that you never know their real name. Some very interesting stories on how they got theirs.

Yep! I went by my real name "Grant" for a long time because I knew I would have to tell the story of how I got my trail name 1000 times and I wanted it to be a good story. Then one night I told people that's why I was waiting to take a trail name and a woman started calling me "Bear Bait" and there was no story...

Edit:

Couple of my other favorite trail names I heard

- Pissbag -- on his first night on trail "ol' Pissbag" peed in a ziplock bag while on the second floor of a A.T. Shelter[0], and then "bragged" about his "brilliant" idea to not wake people up in the middle of the night the next morning and _instantly_ earned the name "Pissbag". I heard stories about "ol' Pissbag" for the first 700 hundred miles of the trail and I was super excited to meet (what I assumed to be) the degenerate who was _proudly_ going by that name. I was shocked when I finally ran into him and he turned out to be a super put together former SF enterprise software salesman. He ended up getting a pretty serious case of lyme disease and had to take several weeks off from the Trail.

- Ballsack -- A former ballerina who carried a leather bag with two massage balls on her pack. Her favorite was when she would meet 70 year old women from church groups who came out to feed hikers and when they would ask her her trail name and she got to see "the light drain from their eyes" when she proudly said 'ballsack'. The woman who went by "D*ck Nipples" told a similar story about how she enjoyed seeing the reaction of little old ladies when she told them

- Chingona -- A woman who didn't speak Spanish got called "Chingona" by a man who did speak spanish, who told her that it meant "Badass Woman". She was insanely proud of it for 500 miles until someone told her that word had some vulgar connotations in spanish and she switched to "Chin"

- High Five -- When someone would ask his trail name, he'd raise his hand up and say "High Five". It usually took people several minutes before they figured it out...

-- 5 & 6 -- A man who's this was his 5th attempt to finish and a woman who would sneak up "on people's 6". Who got their trail names totally separately and ended up hiking the last 800 miles together. Everyone assumed they were a couple because of the names...

-- Pack Professor -- Former traveling musician who was very serious about gear (especially his pack). When we would start drinking he'd turn into "Party Professor".

-- China -- She'd tell people her name was "China" and people would instantly try to guess how she got that trail name. Then she'd let them know that "China" was her real name and she went by it because it was funny to watch people guess and "her parents already gave her a trail name"

-- Schrodinger -- I asked him if he was called "Schrodinger" was because he was really into physics and he replied "No, it's because I'm like schrodinger's cat but with whether I've ** my pants". Later we started calling him "Tool of war" because we found out he had that phrase tattooed on his genitals and he was honestly kinda a tool

[0] https://appalachiantrail.org/explore/hike-the-a-t/thru-hikin...

Those are some great trail name stories! I've got a few...

- Only a test - She accidentally set off her sos spot device and had a helicopter circling her in town and her mom calling.

- Challenger - He gave it to himself as he was involved with the Challenger mission

- Dos egg rolls - Just egg rolls to us, but he was trying to save money and just ordered those, which was about the same price as our huge meals

- U-Haul - was seen carrying their boxes from the post office as part of his resupply.

Made me think of hiker nicknamed 'Mostly Harmless' whom I heard about here on HN some months ago. I saw he was eventually identified to Vance Rodriguez.

Care the share the story behind that trail name?

(I have a pretty good bear story myself, and that's just from a week-long hike on the AT.)

Yeah! I answer how I got my trail name and a few of my other favorite trail names below

Having done just one of the three and suffering through Washington's winter conditions late in October, I'm full of awe when hearing about people who over the course of a Calendar Year Triple Crown had to hop back and forth from one bad weather to another.

In June 2018 I've been lucky to get glimpse of Anish (Heather Anderson) while she was getting her own Calendar Year Triple Crown. Later I read her first book "2600 Miles to Home" where she tells the story of her 2013 Pacific Crest Trail Fastest Known Time (a term that describes record-setting on long trails as well as the name of the website that track those FKT attempts) of the Pacific Crest Trail, which she completed (unsupported) in 60 days and 17 hours. She still holds that record as well as the record that she set for the Calendar Year Triple Crown (251 days and 20 hours). I can only wish I had half her drive.

I can appreciate their ambition but I can't imagine it being very pleasant to do all three in one year. I would find it far more enjoyable to do them in separate years and take more time.

Trail runner here and I wholeheartedly agree. Life is defined by experience, not achievement.

But some people never reach this realization. I live surrounded by very accomplished retirees, and some, on first meeting, give me a rundown of the highlights of their illustrious career.

"What is important in life is life, and not the result of life"

But I think this opinion does get thrown around a lot anytime someone pushes an aspect of hiking. Ultralight backpackers, fastpackers, even ultra runners are all familiar with the trite refrain of "just stop and smell the roses!". I mean sure, but I'll bet any money that someone committed enough to do the triple crown in a single year isn't lacking for gratitude, awe, respect or just simple love for nature. Heck, just by being out there for as long as they were, they increase the sheer number of hours of appreciation. Experience isn't orthogonal to achievement. I'd argue it goes hand in hand.

Certainly and I agree that their experience was certainly rare and unique. There can be a lot of pleasure in discomfort and accomplishment. I did not mean to be a naysayer so much as to emphasize the completely nuts ambition of their adventure. I'd still say it's a rare person who would find what they did enjoyable.

There's some irony here, no, that a trail RUNNER is saying that the OTHER guy is going to fast to smell the roses. That's what I - I'm a trail lumberer - think when the trail runners zip by.

Point taken!

I'm actually quite a lumberer myself; I like running on trails, but my primary metric is time-in-woods, not speed.

Incredible. I did the PCT in 2019 and considered quitting multiple times. I can't imagine the mental strength required to push through the AT, CDT and PCT back-to-back.

Sincerely jealous. The one thing I long for most in my lifetime is enough time off from work so that I can actually train for and hike the pct.

Yes dropping everything for 6 months is probably the biggest hurdle especially for people with kids etc. I was quite lucky, my boss liked the project and agreed to a 6 months unpaid leave.

I always love hearing about the logistics of trips like these, and this article leaves me with lots of questions.

On the AT section, they mention starting out with packs that weighed over 20 pounds, which is extremely light for backpacking. That’s probably a few days of food, a change of clothes, 2-3 liters of water, and an ultralight sleeping bag. But then they mention a tent, too! In contrast, I talked with someone who thru-hiked the AT in the winter, and they said that their packs were routinely over 70 pounds, and that they had ditched their tent in favor of staying in the shelters and wrapping their sleeping bags in Tyvek. How were the guys in the article resupplying? Trips into town every few days sounds very time consuming.

The article also casually threw out that they went through 26 pairs of shoes! Are they buying those at retail? Did they get sponsored by someone?

It also says they mailed themselves packages of food to be picked up at post offices, but it wasn’t dehydrated backpacking food: “Almost half of the airtight bags they had stuffed with rice and beans, tortillas and other fare broke, leaving their food covered in mold.” Has anyone else heard of people relying on perishable food to sit in a post office for weeks/months?

Overall, I read this article with a tremendous amount of respect for the physical and mental accomplishment (that’s a lot of miles and those trails are not easy!), envy, and…bewilderment, I guess? Is dropping $25k and taking a year off school to speedrun three of the most iconic trails in the US a good use of time or money? Part of me would have loved the idea when I was that age, but part of me thinks about all the travel, gear, time asked of family, and time asked of myself, and thinks it would not be worth it.

My hiking boots were good for about 400 miles. Now I use trail runners and I don't trust them after 200 miles - the souls get too smooth. Their combined 14,000 miles divided by 26 means they were getting 540 miles out of each pair.

That "20 pounds" is certainly their base weight--not counting whatever food and water they are carrying. Quite possible with ultralight gear, although a little light in the safety department for my tastes.

26 pairs of shoes between the two of them I actually find surprising--that they used that few.

I'm surprised at the mold--you don't have it sit around all that long, you update whoever is sending them with your location so they know when to send them. There's a limit to how long a post office will hold a package for pickup. And that sort of fare doesn't sound that perishable. I can't imagine beans on the trail, though--they take too much cooking time. Fuel is weight!

(And, no, I've never done any of the great trails, but they certainly sound like an experience. Section hiked in decent weather, not a speedrun like these guys did. I don't think I could handle any of them, though.)

A typical, ultralight backpack weighs about 10lbs, but that can be anything from 5lbs to 15lbs, depending on your preference. Winter conditions add 2 or 3 lbs roughly.

An ultralight tent weighs less than a pound.

Typical stretches between resupplies are sth like 2-6 days, depending on region and preference. Food for a day weighs sth like 1 - 1.5 lbs. So packs with about or a bit over 20lbs sure is no magic. 70lbs with modern equipment sounds weird or unnecessary. Resupplies are time consuming but necessary, you need to wash yourself and your clothes, repair or replace gear and first and foremost eat. Because while on trail it’s unlikely you manage to eat enough.

Your food weight sounds low. High fat food may give you 2,000 kcal a pound; while carbs and protein half that. A 60-something might need 3,000 a 25-mile day; closer to 5,000 for a college student. Its OK to hike a week at calorie deficit. But that could weaken or injure you stretched out to months.

It is what it is, I don’t think I’m an outlier here. Personally I bring sth like 600 grams (1.3 lbs) worth of food a day. Keep in mind that typically you don’t have that much time left to spend on eating. But people are different and there sure are people who carry and eat a lot more.

Also, as I mentioned, when in town you use that opportunity to re-stock. A single meal of 6,000 kcal is not unusual.

And yes, all that is quite un-healthy.

My tent is about 3 pounds and the sleeping bag and insulator padding another 4 pounds. They said they purified a lot of water using pills, so they did not carry too much water with them. 20 pounds is light, but doable.

My most typical weight on the Sierra portion of the PCT, with a typical amount of water, food, was about 30 lbs. That includes warm clothes, tent, bear canister, microspikes (but no ice axe). And my luxuries: Crocs, Kindle, inflatable pillow. No stove.

But where I started (mile 652, Walker Pass) was hot with no sure water until 30 miles in, so for that stretch I started with 13 liters of water, my total weight about 45 pounds.

On a 5-day, 4-night trip I'll bring 4-5 pounds of food. I'm getting better at not carrying more water than I need. If I have to go 10 miles to the next water, I'll drink up and carry 3 liters.

I was on the CDT this year and heard about these guys. It's a crazy accomplishment! I know I was not expecting them to finish all three.

I had friends do the Appalachian Trail and much of the decisioning was on how to start it after the winter but complete it before the next winter. I can see how the trail becomes nX more difficult during winter.

Doing three in a year is remarkable for this reason, I think the almost mandates you done some through the winter.

I did a section of the PCT. Too early in the year? Too much snow. But if you go later in the year the melting snow makes the streams too high and fast and dangerous - people drown. But if you go later in the year the mosquitoes will drive you insane. But if you go later in the year, that's when things dry out the fires will drive you off the trail...

Pick your poison.

Yup, it means hiking in winter, albeit in the more southern areas.

IIRC we are now at the point where there have been the same number of single-year triple crowners as moonwalkers.

The limiting factor going south to north is that you have to climb Katahdin in Baxter State Park at the northern end. And you probably want to do this by about October 15 (and will run into park restrictions shortly after that). (There is a lot of steep rocky terrain through northern NH and areas of Maine as well).

So you have to work back from that to when you start from Springer Mountain in GA which can be as early as about March 15 I gather although you're still sort of semi-winter conditions. Some people recommend starting more like mid-April for better weather and fewer through-hiker crrowdsbut you're obviously giving up 30 days or so of margin.

https://archive.md/czm0B

> A black bear charged at one of them in Washington state.

I'm a 43 yo French guy. In all my life, I only know one man that had problems with wildlife in France: he was charged by an angry wild boar and had to jump in a river to evade it. So I'm not worried at all about my safety when hiking in France.

However if I was hiking in the US I'd probably carry a 44 Magnum at all times (the ultra lightweight one from S&W). I don't know how you guys decide to go in the woods with just some pepper spray and think it's enough! I'd worry that it makes the bear angrier! :D

If a bear charges you, chances are the gun won’t be much help.

At least I would have a chance. I have a hard time believing pepper spray is anything more than a fell good amulet!

Shooting a charging bear is harder than it sounds. If you don't kill it, chances are you'll just really piss it off.

It seems destiny is reading us: this morning in the news a 70 yo French hunter was charged by a bear and shot it 2 times. The man is gravely wounded (femoral artery) and the bear is dead (she had 2 cubs).

I completely forgot that they reintroduced bears in the mountains south of France (Pyrenees) a few years ago.

The only time I've seen a black bear in the US was in my backyard and it got scared of me. It ran away and jumped over a 4.5ft fence. I have seen hundreds of deers on my hikes though...

Unless you mess with them or their cubs black bears are like big tree climbing pigs.

I spent 5 days alone in the wilderness in Denali National Park with only bear spray and another week with a partner in Wrangell-St. Elias. Being in the wilderness in Denali was really unlike anything I had ever done before; hard to explain but I had never been that alone before.

Despite having spent lots of time in wild lands in the lower 48, the only time I felt like I wanted a firearm was during my first 24 hours in Denali.

At the time firearms were not allowed in the national parks but I wouldn’t have brought one anyway. It was good to experience that vulnerability and learn how to just get on with it.

> It was good to experience that vulnerability and learn how to just get on with it.

Nothing bad happened to you; you might think different if you were missing a couple limbs due to a bear attack (yes I know it's probably not survivable).

I spent two weeks out there and had the same experience with vulnerability. I was a very experienced backpacker by then, but that was a a different experience in terms of wilderness.

Where did you go in the park?

I appreciate the goals and tenacity to achieve them of the folks who do this kind of thing but it's not my style.

I've spent a lot of time in our State and National forests and for the past 15 years most of it has been off trail and the past 10 most of my trips have been solo.

Thru hikers tend to focus on the trail and their only goal is making miles. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's not even close to the same as experiencing the "wilderness". It's much more akin to running a marathon. So it's easy to spot thru hikers on a trail. They most always have their heads down and eyes focused on the trail and often won't even say "Hi" as they race by you.

To really experience the wilderness you have to learn how to "bushwhack" off trail. To do that you need to learn how to use a compass and triangulate your position on a map. That's not near as common of a skill as one might imagine thru hikers have.

For me, making miles was never a goal. Immersing myself in the wilderness and finding "Super Scenic Spots" to hang out for awhile has always been the goal.

One of the things you learn when you start bushwhacking is the wildlife will be hiding from you before you even get there. They can hear or smell you coming. But after a bit, if you're quiet, they'll come out and get back their normal routine, and that's really something awesome to experience.

I have to give them credit though because it was thru hikers that motivated me to get off the trails more. Over the years I've increasingly had those folks walk into my camp and ask, and just as often demand, that I give them food and supplies because "I'm out" of whatever it is they needed.

And over the years I increasingly had to to cut trips short because I couldn't say "No" and some of them were truly in desperate need. The first few times I was glad to help and it felt good to help, but after awhile I noticed this was getting to be too common and I grew tired of it because my trips kept turning into rescue and relief missions for those folks and getting cut short.

But when I get off those trails no one ever walks into my campsite. And when I backpack solo I can leave no trace, but when I invite friends who're not really backpackers they tend to want to build a campsite. What I do is much more akin to "Shinrin-yoku".

I do get that when there are too many people the experience is different. I do get that being in the wilderness with, like, earbuds in your ears is different than listening to the sounds of nature. I do get that being off trail can be different than on a trail. I do get that navigating with a map and compass can be different and fun versus using a GPS app on your phone.

But I wouldn't say, "to really experience the wilderness you have to....".

Instead I would repeat the maxim, "Hike Your Own Hike".

Yeah, that's fair. But there is certainly a difference when you bushwhack as opposed to trail hiking to a popular camp site or scenic spot.

Interesting, I’ve never been asked for food etc. I don’t typically really bushwhack or go off trail a ton, but I guess I also don’t frequent really popular trails for the thru hikers.

There have been my own times where I’ve gotten very close to asking for help, but haven’t had to… yet

And I agree that fast hiking and making miles isn’t really my style, but it is fun to do 20+ mile days every now and again.

A great story, no regrets, but I also feel a little click-baited. "Hiking... longest trails..." That sounds rough. "What could go wrong?" Well, that it was indeed rough, apparently...

Impressive. I've taken a liking to day hiking recently in a way I didn't appreciate when I was younger... But ultimately I just want to go home and sleep in a bed.

I did the west highland way in Scotland which was 100 miles in 5 days and my right foot was just a single uniform blister. Good job lads, a serious impressive feat!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com