Food update

I've been reading a bunch more about eating while through-hiking. Looks like most people don't even try to eat enough to keep up with the calories they are burning. There's some logic to that, though. 

The more you carry on your back, the more calories you burn. The more calories you eat, the more time you have to spend eating. The more bulk you carry, the bigger your backpack has to be, further increasing the weight on your back. The more weight you carry, the slower you go, further increasing the amount of food you have to carry.

The generally accepted practice is a sort of feast-famine plan: eat just enough to keep you going while on the trail, and gorge yourself while in town to help make up for the deficit. Scott "Bink" Williamson, a perennial through-hiker of the PCT and contributor to "Yogi's PCT Handbook" with 13+ hikes of the PCT alone to his name, as well as being a Triple-Crowner, does this. He averages right around three thousand calories per day on trail, and then stuffs himself when he can.

You're going to lose weight on the trail. Period. You just have to be careful not to lose too much weight. Every year people have to give up on completing the trail because they become too far underweight. Many others realize they are heading for that, and have to take a few days to a week off to regain some bulk and stamina.

There are some tricks to help with this problem.
1.If you're of a slender build generally (like me), try to put on some extra fat weight before heading out. Gives you more to burn.
2. Get in as good of hiking shape as you can be before leaving. The better in shape you are, the more efficient your body is, so the less calories you have to burn.
3. Lighten your load as much as reasonably possible. As I mentioned earlier in this, the lighter your load, the less calories you burn and the faster you're able to go.
4. Make most of the food you carry very dense in nutrients and calories. Malnutrition can be as bad as lack of calories, and the more calories per ounce, the less load you need.

Putting off the PCT

My plan for next year was to go to school winter quarter, then skip spring and summer quarters to do the PCT and be back in time for fall quarter. That would have given me five months to complete the trail, which is about average. The year after that, go spring to early fall for the CDT, and then the year after that late spring through summer for the AT. Triple Crown in three years.

Unfortunately, it looks like three of the classes I need to complete my degree are only offered spring/summer. If I stuck with my plan, I wouldn't get my degree for four more years, and I would probably be pretty rusty on the subject matter by the time those classes came back around. If, instead, I take those classes this spring, I will be able to graduate at the end of that quarter and be done.

So, I'm pushing back the PCT til 2017. I had considered doing the AT next year instead, but 2100 miles starting in June might be pushing it a little to finish before winter in the north. If it was after having done the other two trails, I would be more enthusiastic about my ability to haul it a little and still complete. Also, with "A Walk in the Woods" out this fall, there are probably going to be a ton of people trying to do the AT next year. (Haven't seen the movie, yet, but I've heard good things and my girlfriend says the book is hilarious.)

As it stands, I'm considering trying to do the Pacific Northwest Trail. 1200 miles from the Continental Divide in Glacier National Park to the Washington coast on the Olympic Peninsula near Cape Alava. It looks to be a good mini version of the PCT. There's high desert in Eastern Washington, which will be good training for the Mojave section of the PCT. It also runs through the Olympic National Rainforest, so (especially if we're heading east to west and so ending in early fall) a good chance to try out our rain gear and preparation. It also starts about where the CDT ends and crosses the PCT, so it will connect the two together. Might have to connect the CDT to the AT after doing those, too.

Check it out: http://www.pnt.org/

Waterproof gear and "wetting out"

So, in my search for a rain jacket, I was considering a few that were super lightweight and supposed to be very breathable. Then I came across a blog that talked about something I knew on one level, but hadn't actually taken to the logical conclusion.

Every rain jacket with a waterproof membrane (Gore-tex, eVent, etc.) has at least 2 layers of fabric to it: the actual waterproof membrane, and the outer layer that is visible to the world. That outer layer is there to help with durability/abrasion resistance. The outer layer also helps with waterproofing by having a chemical waterproofing agent on it. That chemical does fade over time, though. Hence the reason REI sells waterproofing washes and sprays.

Breathability is how much air (especially water vapor) can escape through a material. The more breathable a jacket, the less you sweat while wearing it. The less breathable, the more you are going to sweat, even in cold weather. Usually, the waterproof membrane is the least breathable part of a jacket. This is why most membrane manufacturers are in a race to make more breathable, but still fully waterproof, materials, and it is a huge advertising point.

The process of "wetting out" pretty much negates all benefits of breathability. Wetting out is what happens when the outer layer of a jacket gets soaked. It becomes so full of water that there is no longer any breathability because the water forms an air-proof barrier. The waterproof membrane might still be protecting your skin from the rain, but the lack of breathability means you are going to get wet from sweat. This is why most jackets have some sort of venting, be it a flap on the back or pit zips.

The jacket that first caught my eye was the Outdoor Research Helium II jacket (http://www.outdoorresearch.com/en/mens-helium-ii-jacket.html). Super lightweight, very packable, and supposed to be highly breathable. The lack of pit zips, though, turned me off.

The next jacket was the Marmot Essence (http://marmot.com/products/details/essence-jacket-new). Just as lightweight, this one uses pit vents instead of zips to save the weight of the zippers (every ounce counts on long hikes). Also very packable and breathable even without the vents.

Looking at Marmot brought me to the Super Mica (http://marmot.com/products/details/super-mica-jacket-new). It only weighs a bit more than either of the other two, uses the same waterproof membrane as the Essence, has pit zips, 2 pockets (the other two only have one), AND has reinforced areas where a backpack will be resting. I picked it up and have needed it on one hike so far. The breathability is no joke. I think I'm going to be very happy with it on the trail.

Protecting food (and us) from Bears

One of the biggest pains, gear-wise, on the trail will be bear-proofing our food. There are two generally accepted methods of dealing with this: hanging your food and/or bear canisters.

Hanging your food is the most convenient. All you need is a sack of some sort, some rope, and a high enough branch that's a bit away from your campsite. Toss your food in the sack, tie the rope to the sack, sling it over the branch, and tie it off. All done. Doesn't take up much room or weight. The problem with this is that most National Parks don't allow that method.

Bear canisters are pretty much what they sound like: big jugs that you stick your food in that bears can't get into. These do have the advantage that if bears try to get your food they can't crush it, and they help seal the smells in so bears are less likely to try in the first place. These are required for hiking through most national parks. The downside is that they are big, bulky, heavy, awkward chunks of plastic.

Right now, in the lead for Bear Canisters is Lighter1 Big Daddy (http://lighter1.com/products/). One of the lighter canisters on the market, it still weighs in at 2lbs 4oz. Not ideal. Also awkward to pack.

A new contender on the market is the Ursack S29 (http://www.ursack.com/product/ursack-s29-allwhite/). Not yet approved for use in most national parks, it is a bear-proof BAG. Made of bulletproof material, this 7.8 oz container can be used to play tug of war by 2 bears holding it in their teeth and come out unscathed. This would be much easier to pack and much lighter than a bear canister. There are a couple downsides, though. First, bears can grab it and run off with it, so hanging it out of their reach is still recommended. Second, your food will get crushed by a bear if you use it alone. This is why they make an aluminum liner (http://www.ursack.com/product/ursack-aluminum-liner/) made of airplane grade aluminum (adding 10.8 oz, the system is still lighter than most bear canisters of the same volume). Third, bears can smell the food through the bag, so the company recommends the use of odor proof bags to help avoid drawing bears to you.

I'm really hoping the Ursack is approved by the parks I'll be trekking through by the time my trip rolls around.

Food

Food is going to be probably the biggest hassle and expense in getting ready for the trail. Trying to calculate how much food we will eat on each section, and so how much to put into each supply box. Trying to keep things fairly balanced nutritionally. Getting enough calories.

One figure I keep coming across in my research is 6000-8000 calories per day. That's how much most hikers burn on the trail. That's a lot of calories.

Some food specs:
Clif Bars have between 240-270 calories.
Probar Meal bars have between 350-390.
Bear Valley Pemmican bars: 400 - 440.
Hammer Nutrition Bars - about 220.
Reward brand Trail mix - 110-160 per 1 oz serving

Mountain House meals:
Chili Mac: 600 per pouch
Sweet and Sour Pork: 700
Lasagna with meat sauce: 600

Backpacker's Pantry meals:
Shepherd's Potato Stew with Beef: 600
Pad Thai: 920

So, if I ate some oatmeal with raisin and nuts for breakfast (about 300 calories), a Probar meal bar for lunch, and a Backpacker's Pantry Pad Thai for dinner, that's still under 2000 calories for the day. So, add in a 12 oz package of trail mix over the course of the day. That's another 1920 calories. 5 Pemmican bars brings me up to just under 6000. Eating the same thing every day would get really boring, plus those pemmican bars are DENSE and not very flavorful, so I'd have to change things up, but that gives an idea of what I would have to eat just to not drop weight.

Cost-wise, call it about $2 for breakfast, $3 for the Pro Bar, $7.50 for the Pad Thai, $8 for the trail mix, and $2 per pemmican bar. That's $30.50 for the day. Buying in bulk will get a discount, but still... Multiply even the discounted price by 150+ days. Going to be expensive. And that's just for me. My girlfriend and her dog both need food as well.

Some interesting things I've happened across recently are Soylent (https://www.soylent.com/) and Space Nutrients (http://www.spacenutrientsstation.com/buy). For days when the weather is just crappy and we don't want to set up the stove and try to cook, having a few packs of either around might not be a bad idea. Would definitely want to try them beforehand, both for taste and to see how the body handles it.

As for the dog, I've discovered that there are some companies out there that make freeze-dried dog food. Looks like most of them make it for emergency situations, but parcel it out into day-sized packets, and instant hiking dog food. Also something we need to try for a few days in a row before leaving, so we know how the dog handles it.

The Big 3 vs. the 3 most important systems

Pretty much any backpacker you ask for advice will tell you about "The Big 3": backpack, sleeping bag, and tent. These are the three biggest weight and space sucks on your trip. For most people, if they want to save weight, they'll get the biggest bang for their buck by spending some money and upgrading these. Your sleeping bag and tent also take up the most space out of everything, so getting ones that pack down smaller will allow you to have a smaller backpack, so you'll be able to save even more weight (and maybe some money on the backpack, as bigger ones cost more).

Working at REI, I talk to people about the 3 places you want to spend as much time, effort, and (if you need to) money to get the right thing for you: backpack, footwear, and sleep system. These are more about comfort and enjoyment of the endeavor.

If your backpack is not fitting you right and/or not carrying the weight correctly, its going to throw off your balance, rub raw spots, and possibly torque your back out.

If your footwear (and by that I mean, shoes/boots and socks combo) is not right for you, your feet are going to be miserable. You'll get blisters, jam your toes going downhill, etc. In short, your trip is going to suck.

Lastly, if you can't get a good night's sleep, days two through whatever are not going to be as enjoyable. Get a sleeping bag that has enough room and is warm enough for you. Get a sleeping pad that is comfortable for you. Get a tent that is well rated to keep out the rain and not flap in the wind.

-I used "...for you." a lot. That's because pretty much every day I see customers come into my work saying "My friend has [brand] and loves them, so I thought I'd try them on." Take anyone's recommendation with a grain of salt. Everyone's body is different. Unless you have an identical twin that's had the same injuries and workout regimen as you, any item is going to fit you differently than the person that recommended it to you. Its also going to perform differently for you than them.

First up: the Pacific Crest Trail

So, at the time that my girlfriend told me she wanted to hike the PCT and eventually Triple-Crown, I had not even considered doing any of the three trails. I've been hiking since I was very little, and I love it, but that sort of endeavor hadn't even crossed my mind. I'd heard of the PCT and the AT, just hadn't given any thought to doing them. Now, though, it seems like an amazing, life-changing experience, and just the time to do it. I mean, I'm currently working retail and going to school. I don't have kids. Don't own a house. I have no hard-set responsibilities.

After a bit of consideration, we decided to tackle the PCT first. The AT is shorter, easier, and more forgiving of mistakes, which makes it more attractive to many, but that's also a reason to put it off til last. If we end up finishing the PCT and CDT and then have to put doing the AT on hold for whatever reason, we can do it in our 50's or 60's without too much problem. The CDT, being the hardest, we figure shouldn't be done first. Get a long trip under our belt before that one.

Which leaves us with the PCT. We know people all up and down the West Coast, so that makes resupplies and emergency management a little easier. We also have a large chunk of it right in our backyard, living in Washington, so if winter comes early or something, we can more easily finish any sections we had to skip at another time. Also, we are planning to hike a couple/few of the Washington sections of the trail this summer, so if we have to just haul through some of those sections to make up time, we won't feel like we've really missed anything.

PCT vs CDT vs AT - A quick and dirty guide

So, we have 3 very long distance hiking trails in the US: the PCT, the AT, and the CDT.

The PCT is likely the most well-known of the three, currently, due to the movie Wild. Running along the west coast, it follows a 2650 mile path that starts at about the middle of the Mexico-California border, skirts the edges of the Mojave desert, runs through the High Sierras, and then up through the Cascade Mountains in northern California, Oregon, and Washington. (If you're really hardcore, the trail does technically extend down into Baja, but that part isn't maintained by the US National Forest Service and you can't legally cross the border along the trail northward) Also, many people consider the true end of the trail to be in Canada, as there is another 8 miles of official trail that extends across the border. In terms of both age and length, the PCT comes in second among the three.

map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Pacific_crest_trail_route_overview.png

For more information: http://www.pcta.org


Moving east, we have the CDT. The newest and the longest of the trails, it runs 3100 miles, starting at the New Mexico - Mexico border, up through Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana, ending at the Canadian Border in Glacier National Park. This trail is actually so new that currently many of the sections are still in planning phases, necessitating bushwacking through or road-hiking around incomplete stretches. It is also the highest and most remote (According to the Continental Divide Trail Coalition) of the three trails. Due to length, difficulty, and remoteness, it is definitely the hardest of the three.

map: http://www.unconventionallife.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/cdt_map_large.jpg

For more information: http://www.continentaldividetrail.org/


The AT is the oldest of the three, as well as the shortest at just 2180 miles. On the east coast, it runs from Georgia up to Maine. It is also the most developed. Many times the official trail runs through towns, and there are more than 250 three-sided shelters that have been built along the trail. It is the easiest of the three, and the most traveled: 1800 - 2000 hikers attempt a thru-hike (start to finish in one go) each year, as opposed to 700 - 800 for the PCT, and even less for the CDT.

map: http://www.appalachiantrail.org/images/maps/appalachian-trail-map.jpg

More info at: http://www.appalachiantrail.org/

What is the Triple Crown?

Awhile back, my girlfriend told me about her life goal of completing the Triple Crown of hiking. I've been hiking since I was little, but had never done any long-distance hiking, so I had no clue what that was. I had heard of the PCT (Pacific Crest Trail) and the AT (Appalachian Trail), but hadn't had any real desire to try and hike them. These are both trails that extend from the southern border of the U.S. to the northern border. Turns out there's a third one that I hadn't heard of: the CDT (Continental Divide Trail).

If you complete all three of them, whether section by section or each one all at once, you can contact the American Long Distance Hiking Association - West ( http://aldhawest.org/ ) and apply to be recognized for accomplishing this feat. Doing so will get you honored at the ALDHA-West Gathering and awarded a plaque to commemorate your accomplishment.

For more information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_of_Hiking