Is Lighweight Backpacking Less Safe?

[mochilero]

People sometimes think safety is one of the things we trade off to go light. I may go TOO light at times (under ten pounds for a weekender), but my balance is better, and I've never had a blister since I started going light. Safety is a matter of knowledge and experience too. A trained survivalist will be safer backpacking with no shelter than a neophyte with the best tent.

What do you think? Is ultralight backpacking more dangerous, safer, or about the same?

Steve

http://www.TheBackpackingSite.com

 

[Jaytrek57]

The "hit and run" poster strikes again. :wink:

 

[cbcbd]

The "hit and run" poster strikes again. :wink:

haha, he just wants to build material for his site
and btw, I like your site


As for your question:
Experience is what counts. I guess being a "survivalist" is part of that? I'm just saying that you could have a situation where an inexperienced outdoors person takes tons of equipment, but the wrong equipment v. the experienced outdoors person who takes tons of equipment, but the right and good equipment. They could be carrying the same weight, but the experienced person will know what to bring.

Nowadays there are many light weight (not ultra light weight) gear options that allow a hiker to shave off 10lbs from what he used to carry - still might not be a 10lb bag, but going from a 45lb to a 35lb is still a big improvement. Is it safer? Safer from what? If we're talking injury prevention then anyone would have to say yes since the less extra weight you have the more mobile you'll be - although if you are hiking for months like thru hikers, your body will adjust to the weight of your pack after a month or so, so you'll probably be as safe.

Not getting blisters: I think that's really all in the fit of your shoe. There are 2 shoe sizes, weighed and unweighed. Weighed is the foot with weight on it, unweighed is no weight on it - I guess you could say that with a heavier load your shoe size could increase about 1/2". If that is the case then you need to get shoes/boots that fit that size and possibly some insoles to help minimize the foot elongation when it is weighed down.
I believe the fit, taking in all the expectations of the hike, has more to do with blisters then the weight of your pack.

So...
I think that in the end it's a mix between experience and comfort level.
I believe that as backpackers gain more experience and miles on the feet they tend to want to shave off unecessary weight (for comfort, for practical reasons, because they know they can do without it,or to become closer to nature) and go out there simpler...
...but they'll still be bound by their level of expected creature comforts.

Anyway, I could go on forever and I love talking about lightweight backpacking and different lightweight gear tips... but it's bed time.

 

[thetrailboss]

Well, one can go TOO heavy. While leading a scout trip in 2001, we had one boy who was really struggling. I had checked his bag a couple days before and it was fine, but since then he stuffed in a pillow and some other unneccesary junk (candy, etc). We were hiking in the Northern Presidentials and he was embarrassed when I checked his bag...too much junk. His bag wore him out.

But on the other end, one can go TOO light and in the Whites these are the folks who get into trouble.

For me personally, well, I'm doing better. When I lead a trip I usually overpack to accomodate anyone who is not prepared in the group. I'm down to about 45-55 lbs or so...and I have a Monster Backpack.

 

[Mike P.]

Pillows aside, this also goes with knowing your comfort level in whatever you call bad weather & willingness to turn around.

If you turn around when the first gray cloud is seen, you probably don't need anything but food & water.

On the other hand if you are one of the guys who wants to experience conditions that require crawling up to the summit in 100 MPH winds & white out conditions 6 pounds of gear won't cut it.

I have not seen too many tales of battling epic storms for multiple days in ultralight gear since Dr. Ball.

Knowing when to hold them (plans) & when to fold them (get out) is more important, Having more allows you to mess up this decision some. Without extra layers, a pad & a bivy sack spending an unexpected overnight in late fall is poor conditions is not really an option. Without this stuff, you need to bail back into the trees if there is a fair chance of getting pinned down up top.

Having less means, hike faster, hopefully get up & back before bad weather comes in. You can't get stuck in it though, & you would not start out in it.

Having more means hiking slower, still hoping you get back before bad weather but not overly concerned if you don't. You can hike in bad weather with enough gear.

IMO sometimes going out poor (better than bad, horrific & brutal) weather provides you with another view of the mountains. If you only experience blue sky & puffy white clouds (maybe a stray shower) you don't get the whole mountain experience.

This may explain why you don't hear about too many people who try winter hiking a couple of times & decide just to stick to 3 seasons. While walking the same trail in July & February have similarities, the two trips are also very different too.

 

[Greg]

The "hit and run" poster strikes again. :wink:

Maybe true, but he does stimulate some interesting conversation. :idea:

 

[una_dogger]

I think it all depends...

Certainly I opt for newer lighter equipment when I upgrade, assuming I am making a comparable replacement.
As someone wrote before, shaving a 45 pound (my starting wieght on a five day backpack) to a 35 pound pack is a HUGE advantage, but IMHO this should not compromise safety, and I haven't been able to achieve this starting weight yet.
Summer packs are way lighter than winter packs, so for the sake of the discussion, are we talking summer packs here?

This past week I was packing up Lafayette in a very nasty hail storm and by that point in the trek my pack was about 30 pounds. A hiker came over the top and gave me some helpful advice regarding the slipperiness of the rock slab up above. My first instinct was to look at his shoes, they were trail runners. I had no problem with my traditional backpacking boots, sure I was going up, but as an example, I felt as though the weight he was saving by wearing trailrunners wasn't worth the risk he was taking.

Just my 0.02. Call me a traditionalist, I guess.

Sabrina

 

[Stephen]

I'm starting to think I may be drinking too much water. I start off with 132 oz, and usually fill up at a hut along the way.

-Stephen

 

[MichaelJ]

I've started carrying less water and a filter with me for any hikes that I know have springs or streams. It's a lot lighter and more free-feeling.

 

[SkiDog]

I'm starting to think I may be drinking too much water. I start off with 132 oz, and usually fill up at a hut along the way.

-Stephen

Is that possible to drink TOO MUCH water? Im EXACTLY the same way.....I drink a ton of water and my hiking partners are like WOW..you drink a lot...hey...if I need a drink i'm taking it ESPECIALLY is I know I can replenish..



M

 

[Sherpa John]

ON my longer (time wise) day hikes I ditched some Nalgenes and replaced them with a water filter to try and lighten the load. But I still take all the safety gear just in case something happens.

When I do my "FAST" days I become a serious slackpacker. I only pack water, snacks and the BARE essentials in the event of an emergency. And though I have done so.. it has evolved into something MUCH lighter over the months... I still get nervous with the "what if's"

I would not consider this a question of whether or not it is dangerous.. because that only becomes a question IN the event that something happens IMO. What it comes down to is.. is it more or less practical. I guess it all depends on where you are going and if you are prepared to care for yourself in the event of something happens.

 

[Mike P.]

It's all dangerous, it's a matter of what if.

A RI man was rescued from Bondcliff yesterday or Sunday. He twisted his knee, is that a possible injury for any of us? By the time his partners (one was his son I think) got back to me him he also had mild hypothermic.

SJ when you say care for yourself, what do you mean? As the nights begin to get longer & colder, IMO you should be prepared to spend the night, especially if not on the Tuckerman Ravine Trail on a Saturday or Franconia Ridge or within a mile of a hut.

In July that may just be a rain coat, a light fleece shirt & a space blanket. IN NH from October to May it's more.

I have too many responibilities at home (kids) to risk death from hypothermia because I left a fleece pair of pants or jacket at home. In summer when the nights are in the 60's fine, I skimped & spent a unplanned night in 63 degree weather under a bush

I still have not seen much about Ray Jardine's (or anyone else carrying 3-5 pounds) epic winter mountaineering explolits.

The overpacking crowd tends to tell stories about not going as far, my aching back, I'm working on a sled for my gear, etc., and warm meals. They don't include freezing fingers & toes, running out of food, wishing I had more.

If you flee before fall clouds bring rain or snow you're okay. I didn't drive that far to flee when the clouds start forming, not when I can carry some fleece in case I don't get back before the cr@p hits the fan.

 

[Sherpa John]

Good points Mike... very good. I DO carry a space blanket in the summer.. but never thought of what I'll bring as the weather turns.

Thanks for sparking my thoughts.

SJ

 

[cbcbd]

Mike P, real good points...

About the considerations of winter hiking:
That's why I kind of mentioned in my post that it's all really relative. You can be a minimalist mountaineer... by carrying 35lbs instead of 60lbs.

For the Northeast I think the idea would be to be more creative and shave down on weight with big items. Example - there are sleeping bags that double as parkas.

If you look at the death causes in the whites you'll notice that most of them are from exposure. In the whites I believe everyone should carry at least a space blanket, an insulating layer of fleece or down, a shell (I carry a plastic poncho that can be used to make a shelter), hat, and gloves.

You just need all that stuff out there - if you don't want to carry that much weight then spend the money to buy the lightest gear possible or just hike somewhere else, it's that simple.

 

[Mike P.]

Sherpa John, see the thread on First Aid kits, for cooler temps I'd look at the space Bivy you can buyy for about $25 at EMS over the smaller blanket you see for $5.00 or so.

cbcbd, is your list a three or four season list of gear

In the whites I believe everyone should carry at least a space blanket, an insulating layer of fleece or down, a shell (I carry a plastic poncho that can be used to make a shelter), hat, and gloves.

In winter it seems light. Can you hike long distance in the sleeping bag/parka or is it more designed for being at camp & being able to walk to the privy or designated kitchen?

Parka are great for winter camping once you stop or if you get higher end models that have better DWR coatings or fabrics to keep down dry so you can sweat all day & not ruin the heat trapping ability of the down.

Key with a poncho above treeline in bad weather is too somehow keep it from blowing in your face in a stiff White Mounatin wind & not tie it down on your knees so you can't walk. Why I like pants & jacket

Parka are real good option below treeline IMO, ability to make shelter with it is nice too. Good for camping, IMO poor choice for a spring, fall or winter Presi Traverse or places out west with even larger alpine zones.

 

[Pinnah]

The "hit and run" poster strikes again.

"We all got it comin', kid." -- Bill Munny

 

[cbcbd]

cbcbd, is your list a three or four season list of gear

In the whites I believe everyone should carry at least a space blanket, an insulating layer of fleece or down, a shell (I carry a plastic poncho that can be used to make a shelter), hat, and gloves.

With my list I'm thinking 3 season hiking.

In winter it seems light. Can you hike long distance in the sleeping bag/parka or is it more designed for being at camp & being able to walk to the privy or designated kitchen?

From what I remember (I saw this in a Backpacker issue a long time ago doing a comparison between a light weight and heavy weight hiker) the parka was more for camp or when you stop being active. Since it was long enough to be a sleeping bag it was pretty long to probably walk around freely in for many miles.

Key with a poncho above treeline in bad weather is too somehow keep it from blowing in your face in a stiff White Mounatin wind & not tie it down on your knees so you can't walk. Why I like pants & jacket

True, but I usually put my poncho under my backpack so all the straps hold it onto my body. I guess I'd have to try it out in a rainy and very windy situation. Unless it's pouring I tend to use my windbreaker anyway... poncho to me is the last resort under heavy activity.

Parka are real good option below treeline IMO, ability to make shelter with it is nice too. Good for camping, IMO poor choice for a spring, fall or winter Presi Traverse or places out west with even larger alpine zones.

Did you mean to say "poncho" instead of parka? [/quote]

 

[Mike P.]

Thanks, yes, I meant Poncho

Have a nice holiday everyone