6 ms·

I live in mountains pretty much my whole life and do regular hiking.My advice, you start together, you walk together, you return together. Full stop.

readthenotes1 4y ago
What if someone doesn't want to stop?
- ARandumGuy 4y ago
  Then they shouldn't have joined the group in the first place. If you don't want to wait for others, then find a different group or go hiking by yourself. This isn't that complicated.
  - xenocratus 4y ago
    I genuinely don't understand all these replies about "sTaY iN tHe GrOuP". Sure, if you keep stopping, waiting for others then going straight away that's kinda assholey, but so is demanding that others stop and carry on with you when they don't want to. Starting as a group shouldn't mean ending as a group. I mean, read what you just wrote. > If you don't want to wait for others, then ... go hiking by yourself. That's literally what's happening when you start with a group but don't want to wait for others........... If the others are slow and have no intent to speed up, you should be perfectly free to speed off, without judgement from the group. Otherwise it's just a frustrating experience for everyone.
    - bbarn 4y ago
      Or just set expectations before you start. This entire debate is solved by mutual agreement of expectations. Communication solves these problems, and even if unexpected situational changes occur that might change the plan, communicating those changes helps everyone to help each other. This whole pseudo-philosophical debate can be boiled down to "discuss and be honest with each other and be willing to adapt"
    - ARandumGuy 4y ago
      When participating in a group activity, there is the implicit assumption that the group will stick together. It is acceptable to split up a group if you all discuss and agree to it. But if you just run off on your own without warning, that makes you an asshole.
    - amalcon 4y ago
      If you say "This pace isn't working for me, do you mind if I just go on ahead?", I've met very few hikers who would say no -- except of course cases where that would be dangerous. If you just blitz ahead without saying anything, that's going to bother people at a minimum.
bbarn 4y ago
I hike at least 2-3 times a week, over what I'd consider difficult to the point of being just under needing specialized equipment or training to do. I often bring newcomers with me. There are many times me going ahead a bit to scout the trail and judge the impact of recent weather, etc. and waiting to guide others over technical parts is the smartest play for everyone. Phrases like "full stop" make it sound like you have no room to question your own assertions, when in fact there are enough people with contrary opinions that it might help you to do so.
- bjtitus 4y ago
  > There are many times me going ahead a bit to scout the trail and judge the impact of recent weather I'm curious what you need to judge in advance that's worth getting beyond line-of-site of "newcomers"? I suppose if you're preparing routes which take time this makes sense but I'm struggling to think of examples. Things change awfully quick and it's a nightmare when you lose a group member and have a vast and potentially densely foliaged area to search with rescue teams many hours from responding. As long as everyone's aware of the situation and properly prepared then it's certainly their choice to make.
  - bbarn 4y ago
    The mountains I climb nearby can have the trails erased or dramatically altered by rainfall. The marked route can become dangerous when going slightly off trail can be entirely safe. We also don't have "foliage" in Iceland :)
    - bjtitus 4y ago
      Wouldn't it make sense to take the group along and have everyone turn around when it is impassable? Is the scouting because the group is physically incapable of going the extra distance when route finding is needed? From my limited experience with Iceland's terrain I think I'd be worried about "newcomers" behind me losing the trail so I think I'd be even more wary but perhaps it depends on the group, equipment, etc. While there isn't much dense foliage out here in the Rocky Mountains I've seen many people get separated even in alpine terrain. Especially in boulder fields where groups routinely get separated and I've seen several called for rescue independently after searching for hours.
bjtitus 4y ago
Seriously. I think the author just chose a very poor analogy for their social critique. > unless you're hiking in dangerous wilderness, there is no hard reason to prefer larger numbers. This is simply untrue. Many people hike in groups because it is drastically safer than hiking solo. There are plenty of stories where separated hikers simply disappear after going off-trail in thick brush to use the restroom. THIS is the primary reason why the stigma exists and the author completely brushes it aside. If you're a person hiking in "non-dangerous" wilderness you probably need the group even more since you likely failed to bring a map and compass, much less any survival gear. You may very well not know which trail you're on nor have planned for features and junctions to expect. The bare minimum you can do is stay with a few extra people who can help carry you out when you sprain your ankle or worse.
- glogla 4y ago
  Honestly, the article author probably doesn't even know much about hiking or care. He just uses hiking as metaphor to say "individualist society is better society, I don't want poor people to slow me down".
Floegipoky 4y ago
> Indeed, it assumes that it's very important for the entire group to stick together. That it would be bad to split up, or for someone to be left walking alone behind the pack. This was a dead giveaway for me that the author has little experience hiking. So many comments here about socializing, politeness, etc, not even mentioning the danger. But people plugged into the community and reading about incidents know how quickly things can turn from routine to crisis, and how many of them could have been prevented or mitigated by following these simple rules. Just one of many, many examples: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/06/17/new-hampshire-officials-decide-whether-bill-family-for-costs-rescuing-year-old-hiker/m8vBOzQxkc45TwBVmSILvL/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/06/17/new-hampshire-o... For whoever needs to hear it: HIKING IS DANGEROUS!!! Respect the wilderness, prepare, and take care of each other.

readthenotes1 4y ago

What if someone doesn't want to stop?

ARandumGuy 4y ago
Then they shouldn't have joined the group in the first place. If you don't want to wait for others, then find a different group or go hiking by yourself. This isn't that complicated.
- xenocratus 4y ago
  I genuinely don't understand all these replies about "sTaY iN tHe GrOuP". Sure, if you keep stopping, waiting for others then going straight away that's kinda assholey, but so is demanding that others stop and carry on with you when they don't want to. Starting as a group shouldn't mean ending as a group. I mean, read what you just wrote. > If you don't want to wait for others, then ... go hiking by yourself. That's literally what's happening when you start with a group but don't want to wait for others........... If the others are slow and have no intent to speed up, you should be perfectly free to speed off, without judgement from the group. Otherwise it's just a frustrating experience for everyone.
  - bbarn 4y ago
    Or just set expectations before you start. This entire debate is solved by mutual agreement of expectations. Communication solves these problems, and even if unexpected situational changes occur that might change the plan, communicating those changes helps everyone to help each other. This whole pseudo-philosophical debate can be boiled down to "discuss and be honest with each other and be willing to adapt"
  - ARandumGuy 4y ago
    When participating in a group activity, there is the implicit assumption that the group will stick together. It is acceptable to split up a group if you all discuss and agree to it. But if you just run off on your own without warning, that makes you an asshole.
  - amalcon 4y ago
    If you say "This pace isn't working for me, do you mind if I just go on ahead?", I've met very few hikers who would say no -- except of course cases where that would be dangerous. If you just blitz ahead without saying anything, that's going to bother people at a minimum.

bbarn 4y ago

I hike at least 2-3 times a week, over what I'd consider difficult to the point of being just under needing specialized equipment or training to do. I often bring newcomers with me. There are many times me going ahead a bit to scout the trail and judge the impact of recent weather, etc. and waiting to guide others over technical parts is the smartest play for everyone. Phrases like "full stop" make it sound like you have no room to question your own assertions, when in fact there are enough people with contrary opinions that it might help you to do so.

bjtitus 4y ago
> There are many times me going ahead a bit to scout the trail and judge the impact of recent weather I'm curious what you need to judge in advance that's worth getting beyond line-of-site of "newcomers"? I suppose if you're preparing routes which take time this makes sense but I'm struggling to think of examples. Things change awfully quick and it's a nightmare when you lose a group member and have a vast and potentially densely foliaged area to search with rescue teams many hours from responding. As long as everyone's aware of the situation and properly prepared then it's certainly their choice to make.
- bbarn 4y ago
  The mountains I climb nearby can have the trails erased or dramatically altered by rainfall. The marked route can become dangerous when going slightly off trail can be entirely safe. We also don't have "foliage" in Iceland :)
  - bjtitus 4y ago
    Wouldn't it make sense to take the group along and have everyone turn around when it is impassable? Is the scouting because the group is physically incapable of going the extra distance when route finding is needed? From my limited experience with Iceland's terrain I think I'd be worried about "newcomers" behind me losing the trail so I think I'd be even more wary but perhaps it depends on the group, equipment, etc. While there isn't much dense foliage out here in the Rocky Mountains I've seen many people get separated even in alpine terrain. Especially in boulder fields where groups routinely get separated and I've seen several called for rescue independently after searching for hours.

bjtitus 4y ago

Seriously. I think the author just chose a very poor analogy for their social critique. > unless you're hiking in dangerous wilderness, there is no hard reason to prefer larger numbers. This is simply untrue. Many people hike in groups because it is drastically safer than hiking solo. There are plenty of stories where separated hikers simply disappear after going off-trail in thick brush to use the restroom. THIS is the primary reason why the stigma exists and the author completely brushes it aside. If you're a person hiking in "non-dangerous" wilderness you probably need the group even more since you likely failed to bring a map and compass, much less any survival gear. You may very well not know which trail you're on nor have planned for features and junctions to expect. The bare minimum you can do is stay with a few extra people who can help carry you out when you sprain your ankle or worse.

glogla 4y ago
Honestly, the article author probably doesn't even know much about hiking or care. He just uses hiking as metaphor to say "individualist society is better society, I don't want poor people to slow me down".

Floegipoky 4y ago

> Indeed, it assumes that it's very important for the entire group to stick together. That it would be bad to split up, or for someone to be left walking alone behind the pack. This was a dead giveaway for me that the author has little experience hiking. So many comments here about socializing, politeness, etc, not even mentioning the danger. But people plugged into the community and reading about incidents know how quickly things can turn from routine to crisis, and how many of them could have been prevented or mitigated by following these simple rules. Just one of many, many examples: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/06/17/new-hampshire-officials-decide-whether-bill-family-for-costs-rescuing-year-old-hiker/m8vBOzQxkc45TwBVmSILvL/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/06/17/new-hampshire-o... For whoever needs to hear it: HIKING IS DANGEROUS!!! Respect the wilderness, prepare, and take care of each other.