[pct-l] on the "points to ponder"

[mgeis@xxxxxxxxx (Matt Geis)]

As Scott instructed, I'm trying to not take his post "too seriously," but
wanted nevertheless to offer a very different take on the PCT.  It sounds
like the hike wasn't what he'd expected, or at least that it wasn't as
enjoyable as he'd hoped.  On that note, if that was the case, he did the
best thing possible and stopped hiking.  There were actually people on the
trail in 2002 who had no better reason to keep on hiking than the statement
"We're not quitters."  Seriously.  Some people find the prospect of
abandoning a plan a worse option than recognizing that the hiking has become
consistently unpleasant and simply doing something else (something really
fun) with their time.

Here's a few comments to the points Scott raises.  I could be reading his
email entirely incorrectly, but it sounds like the hike was a real downer
for him, so I'd like to offer an alternative take on it.

+ It's very unlikely that you'll finish the trail.

--Statistically speaking this is false.  Actually, the success rate is
around 35% these days, continually increasing due to the fact that more
hikers are better prepared (thanks in part to this email list).  The PCTA
doesn't have exact numbers, but a couple months ago the success rate for
2002 was estimated to be somewhere around 50%, with nearly 150 hikers
finishing a thru-hike (personally I'm a bit skeptical about these numbers.
Some of the 300 apps for thru-hike permits were simply from people who hiked
fewer than 500 miles but didn't want to go through the USFS for permits, and
others were for fictional people who never hiked, so friends of thru-hikers
could joing them on the trail.  Nevertheless, while the odds favor you NOT
completing the trail, the chance of success is not as bad as Scott
suggests).

+ It's unlikely that you'll make it to Kennedy Meadows.

--I'm curious as to how he gets to this conclusion.  It *is* 750 miles, and
it comes after the Mojave, but I'd call the use of the word "unlikely"
overly pessimistic.

+ Weekend hikers, section hikers seem to be enjoying themselves much more
than thru-hikers.

--Not the ones I met.  Every hiker I met was envious of the thru-hikers,
wishing they had more time to spend outdoors, dreading the return to work.

+ Weekend hikers, section hikers are much more amiable and relaxed on the
trail. (gotta make those miles!)

--Depends on who you spend your time with.  I hung out with some *very*
amiable hikers, who were *very* relaxed.  Scott, on the other hand, was
hauling ass, and was among the most mileage-focused hikers on the trail.

+ Thru-hiking is NOT a healthy exercise program.

--I'd agree, but some people *do* get into great shape.  My cardio health
was outstanding, but my knees took a pounding.  One hiker, a professional
athlete, experienced incredible problems with his feet.  The hike hits
different people in different ways.

+ If you're looking for a 'wilderness experience', walking 25-30 miles a day
is NOT it.

--Walking 25-30 miles a day is not a 'wilderness experience', I would agree.
You can do that in any major city.  However, spending 4.5 - 5 months
camping, basically living outdoors, waking, going to sleep, eating, resting,
walking, talking, doing all that in some fantastic scenery, well, you can't
beat that.

+ Your body processing 4500+ calories a day for several months is NOT
healthy.

--I'd love to read something a bit more scientific on this point.  It sounds
funny, but lots of people do it, not just thru-hikers (athletes, military
folk, to name a couple groups).

+ The town stop food binges would be considered an eating disorder under any
other circumstance.

--Probably.  That's why they're so fun.  You can go into town, eat almost
whatever you want, and your body will make use of it.  Your metabolism kicks
into such a high gear that it can efficiently process just about anything.
Under 'any other circumstance' adding straight olive oil to your meals would
be considered a bit excessive.  On a thru-hike, it's really not a bad way to
increase your calorie intake.

+ Thru-hikers appear to be their happiest when at a town stop.

--That's only because the town stops are usually where you see the most
thru-hikers, and therefore see the most happy thru-hikers.  Just about any
thru-hiker will be able to tell you the joys of leaving town to return to
the trail.

+ Thru-hikers have a sense of urgency on the trail

--That's quite a blanket statement, and more likely than not varies from
person to person.

+ By the time you reach Vermilion Valley Resort, your body will have reduced
itself to the appearance of a Holocaust survivor.

--Riiiiiiight.  That's very nearly in poor taste.

+ By the time you reach the Oregon border, your body will have reduced
itself to the appearance of Brian Robinson. ;)

--I did see a lot of very worthy beards sported by thru-hikers I encountered
in the Cascades, so this is in part true.

+ The most important thing in your life is finding the next water source.

--Only in the desert.  Most of my hike, I carried very little (or no) water,
and just kept mental track of where the water sources were.  In many areas,
there was so much water I hardly needed to think about it.

+ You will ask yourself, "Why am I doing this?" on more than one occasion.

--As you well should.  Hopefully your answer will be better than "because
I'm not a quitter."

+ You will 'appease' the previous question with a continously evolving
answer (oneness with nature, exercise, etc) until much soul searching and
self introspection leads you to a far more interesting real (painful?)
answer.

--Sounds like Scott expects every thru-hiker to have shared his (?) painful
answer.

+ You may not find this answer.

--While the answer may not be cosmically significant, odds are you'll gain
something on this trip, or find some fundamental way in which you've grown
or learned.

+ The most important item, if you feel the human race is sliding into a
quagmire of self interest and self gain, driven entirely by its own greed
and well being, most of the people you meet along the trail will completely
change your mind.

--Very true, maybe the only point of Scott's with which I wholeheartedly
agree.


This whole email of Scott's may have been a joke.  I'm not really sure.  I
only met him a couple times (and briefly at that), both times in Southern
California.  I didn't get to know him (but I do remember that he was a nice
guy), as he was consistently doing some huge miles, and was in front of
about 95% of the hikers (let's put it this way -- I hiked near the front of
this year's thru-hikers, but Scott was ahead of me ever since before Kennedy
Meadows.  During our hike, "T" kept track of who was where, and while he was
on the trail Scott was almost consistently among the 10 hikers furthest on
their way to Canada).  I wonder how many of the thru-hikers about whom he
makes so many assuming statements he actually met, let alone got to know.

Most of his register entries were simply "Still Roaming is still here."
Nothing more, nothing less.  Perhaps he was trying to figure out his hike,
or sort out whether to continue hiking or to stop.  I was curious to know
how his hike was going, since I hadn't run into him since a morning near the
Sierras where we found ourselves comically trying to share the PCT with a
pair of skunks.

At any rate, for those of you planning for PCT 2003, keep in mind that while
Scott offers some interesting points, and ones to think about, they're not
necessarily to be taken to heart as the truth.  For *his* hike, they may
have been the truth, but you may well have a different experience.  You'll
figure your own opinions on these points as you go.  My countering opinions
are merely points of my own, and you may form your own opinions about them
as well as you go.  I figured I'd offer them because a number of people rely
on this list and on the experience of previous hikers to help in the
planning of their hike (and while I'm sure Scott's post is well-meant, it
rings of someone who had a bad experience out there somewhere).

Matt