[jenjen]

I didn't start using the poles until my knee started going funky on me. I still make it a point to walk logging roads and do light dayhikes without the poles so that I keep the small muscles around my knees in shape, but for overnights, rough trails, of off-trail I always use the poles. I've never seen the point of the fragile ultra-light poles. But then again, when my knee pops out of joint, I NEED the support of those poles. I need sturdy ones that won't break on me.

[kleet]

[Backpacker Joe]

Wise guy!

[Helix]

How did this thread become a topic devoted to hiking with trekking poles? Sure poles are great but they are not a safety device. They do not mitigate the risks of back country travel. Poles may help decrease the risk of injury but in my experience anything that can be used effectively can be used inappropriately. Take for example a SAR mission from several yars ago. a group of hikers passed the washout on the old robe trail... something that people do every day. The big mistake was when they used a trekking pole to help each other clear an obstacle by pulling from end to end (like a rope) the pole came apart and one of them fell causing injury. Remember there is no magic bullet that makes you safe. You have to use your brain to be safe.

[Spotly]

[Removed] - never mind...be positive, be positive...

[Hikes with dogs]

My brother speaks German fluently, he's told me the word for that...it means "a good missuse" for something...

[Slugman]

I use poles on tough hikes with lots of steep downhill on the way out. The force absorbed by my arms through the poles is that much less for my knees to take. I can really notice the cumulative effect after a hike. They are also usefull for stream fords and awkward places on trails. I end up just carrying them most of the time during a hike, but when I need them I am sure glad to have them. I see little extra danger in hiking alone. Almost everyone who comes to grief in the wilderness either had someone with them and it didn't help them, or they were killed in a fall for example and another person would have been unable to help. Show me an example of a well-prepared solo hiker staying within their abilities who died solely because they became immobilized but not killed and didn't have anybody to go for help. I can't recall even one such example, though there must be some. The guy who disappeared near Staircase doesn't count, since he made every mistake in the book. Nor the woman who died at Comet falls, since a hiking partner can't save you from falling off a cliff. Sometimes having other people along increases the danger, since nobody wants to be the "wimp" who backs down from a challenge. The fact is you are as safe as you make yourself be, solo or in groups.

[obladi]

well said slugman!

[Blue Dome]

Setting aside if it's more/less fun or fulfilling, traveling in the backcountry alone is more dangerous than traveling with somebody. There are folks who are skilled and experienced and who can reduce the risks of traveling alone, but it’s still a riskier practice. Sort of a common sense issue.

[Slugman]

I disagree. And I'll continue to do so until I see at least one example of a person's life that was saved by another person being along, and no measures they could have taken on their own would have sufficed. It doesn't count if the victim had no overnight survival gear, for example, because they should have that whether solo or not. I'd rather be a well-prepared solo hiker in trouble than to be with somebody and have taken no precautions because of that. I mean, why is it a "common sense" issue yet you give not a single reason why it supposedly true? Common sense also implies that people should believe things for a reason, not just state those beliefs with no reason given. A perfect example of how another person helps exactly zero is the two women missing for a week in the Olympics a couple of years ago. They were eventually found just a few miles from the trailhead, and what was the injury that kept two people out in the woods "lost" for a week? One of them had fallen and dislocated her finger. Now what use is another person if they are just going to hunker down with you for a week over a dislocated finger?

[Blue Dome]

[Tom]

Slugman, hiking deaths are not all that common. Hiking solo, particularly off trail, is also less common. Combine the two and it's not surprising there aren't a lot of examples, but that doesn't mean hiking solo isn't risky. I recall a solo thru hiker that died last year. I believe he got lost. Two heads are often better than one in situations like that. I know of a couple examples closer to home where a life was saved by having someone along when an accident occurred. Mike Collins being one. Stefan potentially being another.

[nuclear_eggset]

[jenjen]

See, now if my hiking partner had a broken or dislocated finger, I'd immobilize the finger, help my partner with their pack, and out we'd hike. If I was the one with the minor injury, I'd expect my partner to bandage me up and get me moving in the right direction. That's what partners are supposed to do - help each other do the rational things required to get back home safely. I've had partners take one look at me on a really hot day and flat tell me to sit down in the shade, eat something salty, and drink. I've told partners who were looking pale and shivering that they needed to eat, whether they wanted to or not - and then bundle up in the sleeping bag with my extra hats and a hot nalgene. If you're solo, you have to do that thinking yourself. I twisted an ankle badly coming down Mt. Dickerman a couple of years ago. I had to think and take off my boot to check the ankle out. Wrap it up. Put the boot back on. Drink up my water to lighten the pack weight (and not dehydrate on a hot day). And hobble down slowly, using my trekking poles as sort of crutches to take the weight off of that ankle. (it was a sprain) This is all possible, but it's easy to freak out when you're solo and just spin your wheels. It's also easy to lose track of your own physical condition and just not notice when you're not thinking straight anymore - because you hurt, you're too tired, you're too cold... whatever the reason.

[Slugman]

I can't refute those examples because I don't know the details. But perhaps they wouldn't have been doing what they were doing if they had been alone. Perhaps the very existance of other people made them take risks they wouldn't have taken alone. So perhaps other people along contributed to their accidents rather than preventing them. And they still are not the kind of example I was looking for. That is of a solo hiker who was found dead of injuries that could have been saved if helped immediately, who made no other obvious mistakes in general preparation for a hike that led to their problem. I can name numerous ways other people can make it more dangerous for a hiker: The "come on, you can do it" syndrome. Egging on by friends has no doubt led to many accidents. The same with showing off. If one person knows the correct way to go to get back from somewhere, but they make the mistake of listening to a hiking partner who happens to be wrong, then they are both lost. A partner can dislodge rocks that hit another person. People getting a false sense of security by the presence of others. How about the lady on Rainier who thought she was safe because of her climbing partners, then she got separated from them and had no survival gear? She would have been better off alone. Solo hikers just give more thought and preparation to safety concerns. And once those good habits are formed, they tend to stick. I prepare for a solo trip even when hiking with others. It means I am always self-sufficient and prepared for the various dangers of the trail. To me that is part and parcel of the wilderness experience. If I want to depend on other people for my survival then I'll go drive on the freeway.