Talk:Backpacking (hiking)

New section

I think there should be a section on minamlists also. We are much diffrent from you ultralight guys!

How so? Where the ultralights might carry a whole titanium cookset, do minimalists just carry the one cast iron skillet? Are the any sources for the minimalist style? -Will Beback 07:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Ultralights may carry a titanium cookset, when a minimalist may carry a titanium bowl. Ultralights focus on getting the weight of the gear they have down, minimalists focus on carrying less, less gear, less weight, less space in the pack. I.E. I have modified all of my cooking and eating gear to fit inside of a cup. Some even go as far as to cut the handle off of their toothbrushes.

It sounds like minimalists are extreme ultralights. -Will Beback 19:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

It still sounds like "minimalists" are exactly the same as ultralighters to me. Carrying fewer items and modding what they do carry is pretty much the backbone of the ultralight style - cutting your toothbrush down isn't exactly a bold new take on backpacking.75.60.97.223 (talk) 11:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)MojaD

I'd like to hazard a guess that ultralights prefer to reduce the weight of each item, while minimalists would rather reduce the number of items. We could have a lumped section on styles of backpacking, but we don't have enough material yet. --Smack (talk) 18:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Will Beback. According to Websters.com, Minimalism: a style or technique (as in music, literature, or design) that is characterized by extreme spareness and simplicity. Is it more beneficial to the reader to create a section specifically to address minimalist practices or elaborate on the lengths to which hikers will go to simplify the experience? Fireclaims 06:04, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

That classic definition of 'minimalism' may hold in general, but in order to understand all the nuances of minimalist backpacking in particular, you have to get someone who practices it. --Smack (talk) 03:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I've created a Winter Backpacking section since there are several distinctions that need to be made there for safety reasons, and hopefully this can be expanded upon. I've included a link to a checklist for winter gear. --Theetruscan 02:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Backpacking Wiki

Does anyone know of a good backpacking wiki? (Or even better one that covers related activities such as Canoe camping [Climbing]] etc.) I imagine there's lots of backpacking info that might not fit into wikipedia. Zabdiel 12:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

This exist but needs more people to contribute :) http://www.backpackingwiki.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.63.174.204 (talk) 20:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Google is wonderful. I typed in "backpacking wiki." The first two hits were Wikipedia articles. The third was this site at MIT. (MIT is wonderful, too, but that's a different story.) --Smack (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The article's name (again)

I was reading through some of the earlier entries and noticed someone had queried the name. Until I had read the article I had never heard of backpacking in this context. In Australia it is know as bushwalking or hiking. I'd heard of the New Zealand term tramping (I always feel I'm tramping around the bush). Which countries call it backpacking? Thanks Ozdaren (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

It's called backpacking in the USA. Bushwalking and tramping aren't used here, while hiking generally means walking in a natural area without carrying enough gear to stay overnight. --R27182818 (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I thought it may have been a US article from the words and terms used. Ozdaren (talk) 01:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The heading of this article is confusing with its USA bias, as has already been commented on. I'd describe myself as a backpacker, even though I don't really travel in the wilderness, and don't camp but stay in mountain huts, in villages, and very occasionally bivouac. My pack is just lighter than someone who is camping.

I also wonder if the use of the term wilderness is correct here? The Appalachian and other American trails, for example, are maintained, with sometimes simple, man-made shelters, are way marked, and presumably often passes through managed forests, etc. Is backpacking in North America only done in the wilderness? Any comments? Rwood128 (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

A simple shelter does not invalidate the general concept of wilderness. If there were food service, electricity, or beds ready for use, then that would violate the concept of wilderness as generally intended. The U.S. federal definition of designated wilderness is more rigorous proscribing man made structures. I take this article to mean the more general concept. —EncMstr (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

• A further thought -- wouldn't 'Backpacking (hiking)' be a better, more inclusive, and accurate title for this article? Rwood128 (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Would there be any objection to changing the opening preamble to the following?

Backpacking (mainly an American term; also tramping, trekking, bushwalking and walking tour in other parts of the world) is defined, as "travel or hike carrying one's belongings in a backpack: [e.g.] a week's backpacking in the Pyrenees, [or] he has backpacked around the world" (New Oxford American Dictionary). This definition refers to two different kinds of backpacking. The first involves hiking and the second mostly uses public transport (see backpacking (travel).

Here the focus is mainly on multi-day hikes, that either involve camping equipment, or make use of simple shelters, or mountain huts, and which takes place in backcountry inaccessible to motorized forms of transportation. A backpack allows a hiker to carry supplies and equipment to accommodate a trip of several days. In Europe backpacking hikers often have the opportunity to stay in villages, in addition to mountain huts, and different kinds of hostel, though they may camp.

Rwood128 (talk) 00:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort you expended to improve the title and lead. But doesn't the Kiwi term tramping refer to any kind of hike, even a day hike: like start at 10:00, return at 15:00, and sleep at home? I suspect the same is true of all those other terms. Wilderness backpacking while U.S., definitely has the meaning of continuously staying in undeveloped (uncivilized) territory for at least one night. —EncMstr (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I was just using in my suggestion part of the current lead, plus the British walking tour, which for me means several days walking. Tramping apparently usually means at least two days walking, and trekking involves multi-days. It seems that backpacking in Europe is different from that in the USA and Canada, because Europe is more developed, and there are extensive networks of mountain huts and other accommodation in villages, so that camping is often just an option rather than a necessity. I also believe that in New Zealand many trails have huts.

It seems that backpacking, as used here, has a specific North American meaning, and that the current wording doesn't make this sufficiently clear. Also the similarities and differences with similar types of hiking in Europe and elsewhere, such as tramping, need to be better explained. The fact that huts and shelters can be found on some North American trails should also be mentioned in the lead. I find the term undeveloped territory better than wilderness, though what is the correct term for multi-day hikes on trails in developed country in North America? -- such trails do exist. Rwood128 (talk) 00:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I suggested that it is possible to backpack in North America in more developed areas, and was thinking of some trails in Canada. One example was the Bruce Trail in Ontario, Canada, but I now see that outside of some private camp sites, that camping on the trail is regarded as "trespassing", and that many parts are too urbanized for serious backpackers. I'm still interested to sees if are any trails in more developed areas of North America that are backpacked. I'm particularly wondering about Ontario and New England. The East Coast Trail in Newfoundland, which can be backpacked, is described as a wilderness trail, but this is hyperbole as much of it regularly passes close to roads and communities, some with restaurants and bed and breakfast places.

Part of my problem with the use of the word wilderness is probably the growing awareness that much of the natural world was already being modified by man thousands of years ago, including the North American "wilderness", ignoring the activities of modern forestry. Remote from human activity, might be a better description of what most hikers mean, when using the word colloquially.

Rwood128 (talk) 13:38, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Water

I added the following: According to health and medical experts, untreated water found in backcountry settings in the U.S. and Canada is generally quite safe to drink. [1]

There is a link to source material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calamitybrook (talk • contribs) 23:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The water section is terribly subjective and narrowly focused. This article in general only truly fits for trips lasting less than three days and this section is no different.

Example 1. It is unacceptable to suggest a person packing out for more than two days should carry the water necessary with them. Proper hydration during physical exertion suggests the need for 1+ gallons of water per day personal drinking, and depending on the recipes for meals through the day somewhere between one and two quarts per person per day for cooking as well. At a minimum, a three day trip would then require 3.75 gallons, or 30 pounds of water, which is a generally followed weight ceiling already for a person even up to 14. As 1 gallon is equal to 231 cubic inches, four gallons would require that the backpacker use nearly 1000 cu.in. of pack space to carry said water. Average weekender packs being in the 3,000 to 3,500 cu.in., this suggestion would send the backpacker out into the woods with a third of their backpack dedicated to carrying water.

Even more scary is the implication that it is unnecessary to carry filtration or purification safeguards when backpacking. Consider the analogy of the fresh egg or the blue-cooked beef. A person may spend years drinking a raw egg in the morning, or eating cold ground chuck on rye at parties and be fine. But we cook eggs and we cook beef for that .01 percent chance there'll be a problem. In the same mind backpackers filter, purify or boil our water for that chance that this source may contain crypto or any number of serious bacteria or fungus. To suggest doing otherwise, especially to novices that may not know the difference between a slow creek and a beaver pond, is irresponsible in the best of cases. Wolfraem (talk) 07:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed this paragraph: Recent research on the topic of consuming untreated water found in backcountry settings in the United States and Canada is beginning to suggest treatment is unnecessary. Cited in this report is a study of a collection of wilderness areas in the Western United States which found infiltrate levels to be well within safe drinking tolerances. State health departments in the U.S. do not find giardia in backcountry settings. "Outbreaks have been linked to contaminated drinking water in small towns, food handlers, and child-care workers who are infected when they change diapers — the researchers didn't find any evidence that wilderness water is a cause." Further research in this topic may eventually shift common opinion away from requiring treatment for most water sources.

Here are some errors that that paragraph contained:

Almost no experts are flatly suggesting that "treatment is unnecessary."

The citation is a newspaper article(!) largely discussing research by one researcher in a specific area of the U.S. The opinions of the author, even IF accurate, cannot dependably by extrapolated to the rest of the world. As a matter of fact that author has said, for example, that he would treat all water along the Appalachian Trail.

Giardia is COMMONLY found in backcountry water sources. The EPA says "(Giardia) Cysts have been found all months of the year in surface waters from the Arctic to the tropics in even the most pristine of surface waters.” http://water.epa.gov/action/advisories/drinking/upload/2009_02_03_criteria_humanhealth_microbial_giardiaha.pdf

There have been verified outbreaks from backcountry drinking water in the U.S., and outbreaks represent less than 1% of giardiasis cases (both facts from the CDC.)

Virtually all public health agencies in the U.S. who have made a statement on the issue recommend treatment of surface water, even in the backcountry. PragmaticRealist (talk) 19:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Re the discussion about water, in Britain I've always understood that it was normally safe to drink water from springs and fast flowing streams in mountainous country above habitation and grazing land. I've also followed this advice in Greece, and probably also in Switzerland, but generally in that country there are public sources at alpine farms, though this water presumably comes from a higher stream/spring. One of the delights of some European countries is the presence of potable drinking fountains in villages, and this can be spring water (but tested). However, the health authorities have to issue their advice, to be on the safe side. Rwood128 (talk) 20:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Images

File:VarsityScoutspreparingtoheadoutbackpacking2004.jpg, File:Stinebackpack.jpg should go, though I couldn't find any decent replacements quickly. Strapping uncovered sleeping bags and other equipment to the outside of packs is terrible practice and we should be showing some pictures of people that actually know what they are doing. The image I added gives the reader some idea as to why someone might choose to go overnight backpacking in the first place. More to the point geodesic dome tents are pretty much the most common type used today by serious hikers (only an empirical observation). Noodle snacks (talk) 02:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

To add to the above, here is why everything strapped to the outside is a bad idea:

1. Getting sleeping bag wet. This can be life threatening in the wrong circumstances, particularly with down bags. Obviously doesn't matter in areas of very low rainfall.
2. Catching the equipment on plants and rocks. This can cause falls. It will also leave bits of foam mat all over the place and can cause holes in air mattresses. This one doesn't matter so much on an easier/more open walk.

If a mat is left on the outside should be covered appropriately. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

♦ I agree on the two Scout pictures, though I think having a replacement in hand before removing them is important. I assume that by "the image I added", you mean File:Tent_at_High_Shelf_Camp.jpg. I don't appreciate the edit warring, and IMO one should tread particularly carefully when adding one's own images to WP, to avoid the appearance of self-promotion (see WP:PROMOTION). Speaking to why I don't think the image works as-is in that section: The section is titled "Equipment", not "Why People Go Backpacking". So images should focus on equipment, not grand places. Also, I don't believe the objection that the green tube tent and yellow dome are "near the road" is valid, since the roads aren't visible in the actual photo. Now: I agree with you that the tent itself in the image is better than the previous two tents. If you were to crop the image down to just the tent, without the grand vista in the background, I'd support using that instead of the green tube tent. Similarly, a vista like this would be appropriate for the lead picture - do you have something like the current lead photo, i.e. backpacker with vista behind, that doesn't look so dated? --R27182818 (talk) 16:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Your comments about self promotion can only be construed as a bad faith (see WP:AGF) argument. There are dozens of cases where images I've placed in articles are removed and I haven't objected. I can only think of one other article where I've ever had an argument of similar about image placement, and I've been here a while. I don't have such a photo, but I might snap one sooner or later. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

♦ WP:AOBF. WP:ADHOM - appeal to authority (your dozens of other cases) is a fallacious argument. I think it's fair to be annoyed by someone who repeatedly re-adds an image they created despite repeated requests to discuss the new image on the talk page first, given my legitimate concerns with the appropriateness of the image for the context in which it was being placed. Regardless, I made the suggested crop and swapped in the image. I think this is ample evidence of good faith. --R27182818 (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The pictures are the first thing I noticed that is wrong with this entry. I haven't even made it to the actual text yet. These images could have come from a 1970s issue of Boys Life magazine. As a backpacker that has hiked on many continents, I have endless high quality images of hikers and camps and equipment and water filters and stoves and other equipment. Yes, they are my own images, but I would be careful not to add any that actually have ME in them. Is there an issue with this? These pics are awful. So many times on t he trail I see hikers carrying outdated, ineffective equipment purchased form a yard sale or left over from their boy scout years. This is not how backpacking is done anymore.Mccue3g (talk) 15:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Every time I spend more than two days in wilderness, I do see old timers using that kind of equipment as well as older homemade versions. I saw even older equipment in use in Austria a few years ago—it looked late 1800s. Perhaps the photo captions can include the year they were taken to more accurately convey their relevance, but I'll be sure to take a 2013 version with 1950s gear being used to help balance that out. —EncMstr (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed un-necessary information (vandalism?)

I believe that the recent edit, which deleted a fair amount was not vandalism but a genuine attempt at improving the article, which is certainly overly wordy in places. However, it might be better to first discuss this here, and to start pruning more slowly. But I'm inclined to agree that the sections "Professional Backpacking" and "Motivation" might well be deleted, or, at least, reduced to sentences elsewhere in the article. Rwood128 (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

The idea of professional backpackers is very dubious. Soldiers are soldiers, geologists are ... and so forth. The two named, long distance/challenge walkers presumably earn their living from writing and lecturing. The section "Motivation" doesn't seem appropriate for an encyclopaedia article, though the odd sentence might used in another section. Rwood128 (talk) 20:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

merge with trekking?

please see: Talk:Trekking#Article merge with redirect? - Nabla (talk) 12:37, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Article merged: See old talk-pagehere

Reference

References

Wilderness

Backpacking doesn't always involve wilderness, so the title is incorrect – any objections to changing it to, say Backpacking (on foot)? Furthermore, there is the question as to what is wilderness. Someone pointed out to me that what was outside a mountain hut high in the Alps was cow pasture! Rwood128 (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I now realise that we (mostly me!) have discussed this before. But I still feel the the title is incorrect. Wilderness is not mentioned in the lead. Rwood128 (talk) 11:16, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Presumably backpacking (travel) is also done on foot (at least somewhat). How about Backpack hiking or Backpack camping? — hike395 (talk) 14:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, hike395. Backpack hiking is better, as camping isn't the only form of shelter, though USA usage may be different here. Rwood128 (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

In the U.S.,

• "hiking" means going on foot in natural or wild settings, for any amount of time
• "backpacking" generally implies hiking, but for more than one day and setting up a camp. Backpacking means that you carry your own gear
• "camping" means setting up a tent or camp and sleeping outdoors
• "car camping" implies that the camp is immediately next to a vehicle, no hiking
• a "pack trip" means that you ride a horse, or the horse carries your equipment, and then you camp.

And, to make things more confusing, hiking is usually done with a backpack, even if one is not backpacking!

Not sure if this helps. — hike395 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@Rwood128: The camping article lists "backpacking" as a form of camping. Given the use of backpacks in hiking, and given that "backpack camping" is not really a common term, I think we should rename this article Backpacking (camping). — hike395 (talk) 21:41, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't associate backpacking necessarily with camping, just carrying a rucsac on my back for more than one day: "the activity of travelling or going camping while carrying your clothes and other things that you need in a backpack" (Cambridge Dictionary). See the lead also. Rwood128 (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC) A synonym for a walking tour; the kind that Wordsworth and Coleridge did. Rwood128 (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Is hut-to-hut hiking considered backpacking? I would have thought not, but I can see that some people use that terminology. May I suggest changing this article's title to Multi-day hiking? That would be unambiguous, at least. And people commonly say "that is a multi-day hike". — hike395 (talk) 04:19, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I thought that I should do more research on this topic! Differences between the various versions of the English language tend to cause confusion. The fact that the term is also used for non-hikers doesn't helps. According to the Oxford Dictionary the noun backpack is "Chiefly US". Backpacking is generally defined as carrying a backpack. An ngram search for the term "backpacking" gives US examples, plus the odd reference to South American: [[1]

It is interesting that the British store/shop Blacks distinguishes between rucksacks and backpacks: [2]. And I notice that the term "trekking" is becoming a vogue word in Britain for multi-day hikes. Other terms common there are "tour" and "walking holiday". I also see that in Britain the words walk and walking are frequently used whereas hike/hiking are preferred in North America.

It is in effect a specific North American form of multi-day walking/hiking holiday. A former article Trekking was merged with this article. Given all this, hike395, your suggestion to change to Multi-day hiking (or hikes?) sounds good. Rwood128 (talk) 12:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

The fact that there are chains of accommodation on many long distance paths in Europe, unlike in the Americas is a significant factor here. The term "multi-day hike" appears to be common in Australia and New Zealand. Rwood128 (talk) 13:19, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 17 November 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page to Backpacking (hiking) at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 10:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

---

Backpacking (wilderness) → Multi-day hiking –

• Current disambiguator (wilderness) is incorrect: backpacking can occur outside of wilderness areas (overly WP:PRECISE)
• "Backpacking" is a North American term, "Trekking" and other terms are common elsewhere (WP:COMMONNAME)
• "Backpacking" is ambiguous: does it cover hut-to-hut hiking and pack-supported trips? (WP:PRECISION)
• "Multi-day hiking" removes the ambiguity: this article covers any multi-day hiking trip
• "Multi-day hiking" also is unambiguous with respect to Backpacking (travel), a generic mode of travel
• "Multi-day hiking" is a fairly common term in North America, Australia, and New Zealand

— hike395 (talk) 14:38, 17 November 2019 (UTC)—Relisting. Cúchullain ^t/c 18:45, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Is this actually known by this name?--69.157.252.96 (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes. A Google Search returns 198K results for "multi-day hiking" and 290K results for "multi-day hike". Websites that use this terminology include the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, Backpacker Magazine, and Outside Magazine. A number of books use "multi-day hike" or "multi-day hiking". Unfortunately, Google ngrams doesn't work for hyphenated queries, so we can't directly compare to backpacking. — hike395 (talk) 19:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

It appears Ngrams do work here: [3] (shows up with extra spaces but is processed the same [4]) – Thjarkur (talk) 20:23, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I was trying something fancier (with _INF), which didn't work, but I should have tried a simple test. — hike395 (talk) 03:00, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Unless I am missing something it appears that the current title had been consistently in far greater use then the proposed one.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 06:35, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Just to clarify Hike395's comment, it's true that the phrase "multi-day hike" or "multi-day hiking" appear in the sources mentioned (Appalachian Trail Conservancy, Backpacker Magazine, Outside Magazine), but not to the exclusion of (or even necessarily as often as) other terms, including 'backpacking'. (example of Outside using 'backpacking'). Also, it can be hard to tell whether these sources are using it as a fixed phrase vs. simply composing an adjective and a noun. Colin M (talk) 03:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Can the six points raised above be addressed not just statistics. The Ngram results for backpacking seem to come mostly from the US; but I only did a quick survey. And the term is generally used for travel backpacking more than hiking. Rwood128 (talk) 12:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

• re the precision concern: Could you give examples of activities which aren't undertaken in wilderness but which fall under this topic (and not backpacking (travel))? Also, I'd be curious to hear what you or others think about Trekking or Backpacking (hiking) as alternatives. I would find either of these more natural. Colin M (talk) 03:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

In the United States, one can do backpacking exclusively outside of a wilderness area. For example, the Pacific Crest Trail has many miles that lie outside of wilderness. That was the original objection from Rwood128. Because I'm a United Statesian, "trekking" to me has the connotation a long hike in the Himalaya. But readers from the Commonwealth may find it a general and natural term to use. Trekking is actually more common of a term than backpacking: Google ngram link. This web site claims that trekking is hut-to-hut, while backpacking is self-sufficient. More websites comparing the terms: [5], [6]

Backpacking (hiking) is a bit awkward, but would be ok with me. — hike395 (talk) 08:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Trekking also suggests the Himalayas to me, with conatations of an elaborate support system. The phrase "walking/hiking tour" is becoming more common and I also found "Continuous walking holidays" for walking long distance paths (Ramblers walking holidays, UK).

The term used seems to vary with the age and place of origin of the walker/hiker – I'm not a particularly reliable source because I'm a v. ancient, dual British-Canadian citizen, who carries a rucksack not backpack and walks rather than hikes. However, Backpacking (hiking) appears to be a more accurate description of various types of multi-day walks/hikes. Rwood128 (talk) 11:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

So, hike395, Colin M, 69.157.252.96, Þjarkur what now?

This discussion has been open for >7 days, so soon (-ish - RM has had a pretty long backlog recently) someone uninvolved will come along and either close the discussion or relist it to generate more discussion. Not much we can do but wait. Colin M (talk) 00:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Rwood128 (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

• Support alternative Backpacking (hiking) suggestion as more clear as to what the article covers.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.