We humans are nothing if not resourceful. When faced with the first-world problem of setting an FKT, we'll dig into an ever deeper bag of tricks to get this job done. Technology helps us, until it doesn't. There's a point of diminishing returns and I think that point has been reached.
We can hardly escape using technology as a crutch. My most recent experience with this phenomenon is while practicing navigation with map and compass. Apps are there to verify my location and buffer me from some level of uncertainty. I can stay in my comfort zone, beyond the threat of real growth.
We can fool ourselves with technology in other ways, too. As convenience creeps into our lives, it begins to break up long-held conventions of long-distance trail records. Similar to the Pandora's box of trail magic, technology can compromise our self-sufficiency.
The terms "supported" and "self-supported" have long been used to differentiate between two styles of record. I've read a proposal that "team" and "individual" be used instead. But I think this is inaccurate. Self-supported can increasingly be remotely-supported, maybe even by a whole team.
Full disclosure: a decade ago, I advocated for more technology to boost transparency with self-supported records. I developed a delayed track map with options for timestamps to be obscured, or eliminated altogether. I tested it on a 300+-mile hike and Ben automated this idea.
Since that time, the FKT site has refined its guidelines. Records now get verified by regional editors, but note their disclaimer that the public still plays an important role. Transparency remains best practice. I'll add too, in my opinion, documentation should be kept outside of social media logins and paywalls.
What got me thinking about this lately is Jeff Garmire's amazing self-supported AT record of 45d8h37m. To be clear, I'm not calling foul with Jeff's effort! I do think we're once again at an inflection point with the self-supported style. We might ask: "where do we go from here?"
I'm honored to have been invited onto Jeff's podcast to talk about his recent Appalachian Trail record. I’ve been interested in these self-supported journeys for some time and have watched them evolve and get faster and faster. I’ve also watched the style evolve with the inevitable tech-creep.
Regarding Jeff’s attempt, his documentation was on point, check out this track map! I didn’t really start binge watching until his maildrop mishap in the Shenandoah. His struggle through a 160-mile food desert struck a chord with my 2013 hike. I was hooked from then on to see how he worked the problem.
Jeff escaped relatively unscathed. But with low battery, he had to turn off his tracking for a day until Daleville. It seems in this age of hyper-connectivity, hikers are mobile data centers. Without time to charge at an outlet, Jeff relied a lot on power banks. I think they in turn ended up in hiker boxes.
Much to the relief of spectators such as myself, the show could go on with a new battery. Powering devices for documentation adds logistical stress to these attempts, but it’s also a two-way street. What I mean by this is that the hiker benefits from access to a more and more robust support network.
As this record gets faster, there's less potential and incentive for aspirants to eschew the crutches of trail magic and technology. But I believe in order to keep the self-supported record a solitary effort, we should encourage just that. Those to come get to decide.
As for me, I've got no more skin in this game. In my prime I wouldn't have been able to even imagine a sub-50 hike and I'm just getting older and slower. So I'll just stay focused on my map and compass in hope of learning a new trick that doesn't involve the remote control that's burning a hole in my pocket.
Comments