I have a point to bring up that I don't think should get too contentious, but I am curious as to the reaction people will have.
I have been hiking for awhile, but I only recently have I begun to monitor Adirondack trip reports on this and many other sites around the internet. One of the aspects of winter reports that has surprised me is the extent to which people will comment on finding postholes in the snow. I have read numerous reports which are essentially worthless in terms of important details (not on this site, of course, which feature extremely detailed and often interesting reports) but will go on and on about postholing hikers.
I find this curious, since I have always found that snow, whether packed or freshly fallen, is a malleable and unreliable surface which provides fun variety to a hike. I cannot see how a hole in the snow really matters when one is employing snow shoes anyway, since the shoe will distribute ones weight throughout the entirety of the surface in question and not upon a single point which may or may not be sunken in.
It's probably stupid to go hiking in the winter without snowshoes, but if one is conscientious enough to have snowshoes for him or herself then what other people do is really a moot point. I understand that it is more aesthetically pleasing to see a trail broken by skis or snowshoes only, but the trail surfce is hardly the most important part of the scenery.
I am not trying to stir a debate, but I think it is fair to point out that this obsession of featuring postholing as the main aspect of brief trip reports seems a bit uninspired. Any thoughts?
Jason Feulner
I have been hiking for awhile, but I only recently have I begun to monitor Adirondack trip reports on this and many other sites around the internet. One of the aspects of winter reports that has surprised me is the extent to which people will comment on finding postholes in the snow. I have read numerous reports which are essentially worthless in terms of important details (not on this site, of course, which feature extremely detailed and often interesting reports) but will go on and on about postholing hikers.
I find this curious, since I have always found that snow, whether packed or freshly fallen, is a malleable and unreliable surface which provides fun variety to a hike. I cannot see how a hole in the snow really matters when one is employing snow shoes anyway, since the shoe will distribute ones weight throughout the entirety of the surface in question and not upon a single point which may or may not be sunken in.
It's probably stupid to go hiking in the winter without snowshoes, but if one is conscientious enough to have snowshoes for him or herself then what other people do is really a moot point. I understand that it is more aesthetically pleasing to see a trail broken by skis or snowshoes only, but the trail surfce is hardly the most important part of the scenery.
I am not trying to stir a debate, but I think it is fair to point out that this obsession of featuring postholing as the main aspect of brief trip reports seems a bit uninspired. Any thoughts?
Jason Feulner
Comment