[at-l] Slackpacking, respect for others, and Hiking One's Own Journey.....

[baltimorejack@hotmail.com (Jack Tarlin)]

I was gonna stay out of this one, having already replied to Mr. Nomad.  He 
conveniently chose to ignore my original post---which is of course, his 
right---but just for the hell of it, let's try again.

1.  As far as slackpackers losing their freedom, well this is, of course, 
true, up to a point.  By not carrying tent, full foodbag, camp gear, etc., 
they are limited on where they can stay, and as they are generally packing 
minimallly in the way of food, extra clothes, etc., they are also at some 
risk in the event of major emergency---injury, really awful weather, etc.  
In short, by surrendering their full pack, they are absolutely dependent on 
finishing their slack, and either getting back to town or reaching their 
prearranged rendezvous with the person picking them up.  So yeah, to some 
degree, they lose their independence.
   But guess what, Nomad?  They CHOOSE to do this.  It's voluntary.  It's 
THEIR decision, and they've weighed the risks, and they know what they have 
to do by day's end.  And if they choose to hike without a pack for awhile, 
why on earth does this trouble you so? Why on earth should you care?  And 
why on earth is it any of your business?  When I slackpack, it's for any 
number of reasons----on my last trip, I slacked a week in Tennessee, 
primarily to make it easier on my injured leg.  I wanted to keep hiking, I 
didn't want to fall way behind my friends, I didn't want to sit on my ass 
for a week in a hostel or a friend's house, and I sure in hell didn't wanna 
carry 45 pounds either.  So I didn't.  I made my miles, or most of them, I 
got my leg back together, I stayed even with my friends, and I had a great 
week.  Why on earth this would trouble or concern anyone but me is truly a 
mystery.
   On other occasions, I've slacked in order to have something of a "rest" 
day without necessarily taking half or a full day off from walking.  
Slacking for awhile absolutely gives your a body a break from the everyday 
wear and tear it's been going thru.  Gee, is this a crime?  I always thought 
it made good sense to take care of yourself, and go a bit easier when 
necessary.  In my experience, people that neglect what their body is telling 
them quickly find themselves at home.
   Other times, I've slacked in order to get my miles in, but still be able 
to spend some "quality" or extra time in town, or with friends or family who 
live near town.  If I can get my fifteen miles in by three o'clock in order 
to spend more hours in town with friends or family I haven't seen in years, 
is this such a terrible thing?  And if I choose to do so, why on earth would 
someone like Nomad care?
   I will grant that Nomad has a point----you lose your opportunity to stop 
and camp anywhere you wish----but only for that day, a day you've already 
voluntarily chosen to stay elsewhere.  And incidentally, some of the nights 
I've slacked, I've STILL spent the night in the woods---it doesn't 
necessarily mean you've committed to leaving the trail, to going to town, 
whatever. Frequently, I've gotten my gear back,and then continued on a bit, 
and stopped whenever I felt like.  In short, people decide to slack for lots 
of reasons, and they've considered the advantages and very few 
dis-advantages.  They ultimately make their decision based on what's best 
for them that day---repeat, what's best for THEM.  It isn't any one else's 
affair.

   2.  Nomad's argument that one misses nature by slacking is also untrue.  
Obviously, if you stay in town that night, you miss out, but as I said 
above, not all slacks end up in town.  And also, the "speed hiking" factor 
is also un-applicable.  Not every slacker is flying down the trail at 3 and 
a half miles an hour.  So do.  Some don't.  Some slow down.  I generally go 
faster when I want to, and slower when I want to.  I usually take longer 
breaks at particularly pretty spots.  I've also stopped a lot of time to 
observe wildlife----you actually have MORE time to do this when slackpacking 
as your generally faster pace gives you the freeedom to take more frequent 
and longer breaks than you ordinarily might; for example, if I know my slack 
day will put me fifteen miles down the Trail by the middle of the afternoon 
NO MATTER HOW FAST I GO, well maybe I'll sit at a scenic view and watch the 
hawks for half an hour, something I'd probably NOT do if I was carrying a 
full load, and determined to do my full fifteen by dinnertime.  The fact 
that you're packing lighter often gives you MORE options to rest, relax, 
take side trails to scenic viewpoints, etc.  So Nomad's contention that 
slackpackers miss out on the wonders of nature is absurd.  Sometimes the 
exact opposite is true.

   3.  The contention that it somehow degrades the trip if you attempt to 
make it easy on yourself is also ridiculous.  After all, hikers do this ALL 
the time---they carry only what they need; they figure out their food needs 
so as not to pack un-needed stuff; they get rid of un-wanted clothes and 
equipment; they give away extra food to others to save pack weight; they 
up-grade and improve their equipment; they take breaks and time off to rest 
and heal injuries; they take town or motel breaks to charge their personal 
batteries.  The Trail is obviously tough enough----nobody is out there 
trying to make it HARDER, for heaven's sake.  In fact, people are constantly 
trying to make it a little easier on themselves.  This is only common sense. 
(Note:  I'm not talking about yellow-blazing, road walking parallel trails, 
etc.  I draw a distinction between skipping chunks of the trail, and merely 
deciding to carry a lighter pack for a little while.)
   Oh, and as far as the alleged crime of making it a bit easier on oneself 
every now and then, I see Nomad's astounding statement that "I personally 
feel much better about myself when I suffer a little."  Well, OK, pal, sorry 
about your guilty conscience.  If this is how you manage to feel better 
about yourself, well have a nice day! You wanna suffer everyday---well, by 
all means carry on! Have a ball! Evidently, the more miserable you are, the 
happier you find yourself.  You sound like a real barrel of laughs to me.

   4.  Lastly, we see the remarkable statement where Nomad states "I believe 
that the public's perception of hiking the AT is in direct proportion to its 
support of safeguarding the AT corridor."   I assure Nomad that the general 
public couldn't give a fiddler's f*** about how anyone hikes the A.T.  They 
really don't care---and their "perception" of how one hikes certainly 
doesn't include analyzing what one chooses  to carry in their packs on any 
given day. The public doesn't give a rat's ass what an individual choses to 
carry---and neither should anyone else.  Nor should it matter to anyone else 
how big someone's pack is, whether or not they carry a tent or stove, how 
far they choose to go, how fast or how slow, or where they want to end up at 
the end of the day.  They wanna stay on a mountain top?  Fine, it's their 
business.  They wanna stay in a motel?  Again, their business.  They wanna 
get picked up at a trailhead by their best friend at 4PM and enjoy an 
evening in town?  Again, their business.  Nobody else's.

    And that's the main point of this extended post.  It shouldn't be anyone 
else's business.  I'm a little curious about Mr. Nomad.  Has he ever 
actually thru-hiked?  Or is he simply another authoritative expert who knows 
it all without having bothered to make the trip?  If he has in fact 
thru-hiked, it sure doesn't sound like he developed a whole lotta respect 
for other people in his 6 months on the Trail.   Most people are a helluva 
lot less judgmental after they've been out there awhile; it sure doesn't 
sound like this happened to Nomad.  Maybe he was too busy each day looking 
for ways to make himself suffer.
    And if he HASN'T thru-hiked, then he's trying to tell people how to do 
something he himself has no experience with, and trying to dictate to others 
how they should be hiking THEIR journeys.  Either way, his arguments don't 
hold water.  As I said earlier, in a much briefer, but perhaps blunter post, 
if it's not YOUR trip, then you might wanna temper your comments a little.  
If it's not YOUR pack, then you might wanna restrict your obsession with 
what's inside of it.  Just cause it's not YOUR way to travel doesn't make it 
wrong for someone else, and even if it bothers you, at least have the tact, 
maturity, common sense, and respect for others so you keep your negativity 
to yourself.  People who have pathological problems with what OTHER people 
are doing on the Trail are generally pretty unhappy folks, and are generally 
having pretty awful trips.  Instead of constantly finding ways to find fault 
with others, they should perhaps concentrate on their own journeys, and ow 
to improve them,  or if they must suffer while they're out 
there---especially the ones who "feel much better" about themselves when 
they're in torment-----well, for Chrissakes, suffer in silence, OK?  But as 
far as finding ways to criticize how others choose to hike, give it a rest.  
It simply isn't anyone else's business.

   And having said all this, it's time to go back to my packing. However, 
I'll refrain from sending along a Gear List.  God knows, I sure wouldn't 
wanna offend anyone by carrying the wrong stuff.




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx