Serious question, why do so many people ignore elevation gain when planning trips?

I was out on the Pacific Crest Trail near Mount Whitney last weekend and saw this group struggling hard on a 10-mile section that only looked flat on paper. They had no idea it was 3,000 feet of gain because they only checked mileage. I used to do the same thing until I got caught out on the Hoh River trail in Olympic and hit a brutal 2-mile climb at the end of a long day. It is way more important to plan around total elevation per day than just distance. How do you guys figure out if a route is actually doable before you head out?

3 comments

3 Comments

quinnm777d ago

...and that's exactly how my buddy Dave and I ended up hiking what we called "the staircase from hell" near Mount Rainier. We checked the map for distance, it was 8 miles, easy right? We completely missed the 4,000 foot climb. By mile 6 I was pretending to tie my shoes every 5 minutes just to catch my breath. Now I use Caltopo religiously and always check the profile view before I even grab my pack. My rule of thumb is if it's over 1,000 feet per 5 miles, I plan extra breaks and maybe skip the whiskey at camp.

sean_barnes246d ago

Man, that's like the time I trusted a trail sign that said "scenic viewpoint" and ended up lost for 6 hours.

patricia326d ago

Has anybody else noticed that trail apps make it way too easy to just glance at distance and hit the road? I did that once on a trip in the Sierra Nevadas, saw a 7-mile loop on AllTrails, totally ignored the 2,500 feet of gain, and my knees were screaming by lunch. My buddy laughed at me but then admitted he did the same thing last year on a hike in Yosemite, ended up crawling back to the car like a zombie.