u/trailangel4

Since my last post, I've gotten quite a lot of feedback from hikers and trail angels. Most of it was very positive. However, I got a specific DM from someone who argued that TA's are "ruining the trail". Here, with their permission, was their DM: "I know your heart is in the right place but trail angels are ruining the PCT. Your (sic) conditioning a generation of hikers to expect trail magic and freebies. The water caches are bullshit. Enabling hikers who can't do the hike without help is the problem with the trail."

So, I've been sitting with this comment and weighing it for a few days. I figured I'd play devil's advocate because I don't think this person is entirely wrong. I'm interested to know what the rest of the community thinks.

For me, there are some valid truths in this statement. I have been a TA for several decades and I remember what being a TA looked like 30, 20, 10, or even 5 years ago. I've also done my own thru hike so I know what I experienced as a hiker in the 90's and 2000's on LDTs.

* Trail Angels are creating an expectation that isn't realistic. - The entitlement is real. The majority of hikers are no longer hiking just to hike...they're hiking for an experience that, more and more, has shifted focus from the actual hike to cultivating content and a pedi-cruise that happens to include hiking between ports. TAs and Trail Magic used to be the exception and weren't something that hikers *planned* to utilize. When I hiked LDTs, I literally hiked into town and hiked out of town...now hikers consider off trail miles to be a burden and expect/want pre-scheduled transportation. Trail Angels have allowed and encouraged this entitlement. Hikers also now plan stays with Trail Angels in advance of their arrival into certain towns and make it the norm, rather than the exception. On some level, if you signed up to hike a trail for six months and spent thousands on gear to sleep outside, then why are you pre-planning weekly zeroes with trail angels?

* There is a significant, adverse financial impact. - Trail Angels who host for free create a sense of entitlement. In reflecting on my own experiences (and those of other Trail Angels), I cant deny that the financial burden on hosting hikers has become untenable. Realistically, I just can't continue to host/drive at this pace. Now, as I've said before, I have a budget that I'm strict with - when I exceed the amount I'm able to securely part with in a season, I stop TAing because I'm not going to go put my family's financial security at risk. However, there is a level of guilt (on my part) and a level of anger/frustration on the part of hikers that is expressed when I won't meet their need. When I find myself resentful of hikers because they won't accept "no" or continue to up the ante to see if there's a point where I will magically set aside my boundaries to help them, that is on me. I should just stop answering the phone and have my name taken off lists when that threshold is exceeded. Beyond that, by hosting people for free or "for donations", we're actually devaluing businesses that provide lodgings. And, while we can argue that Trail Angels are positively helping stretch a hiker's budget, it's reasonable to ask if that's actually helping our communities and trail towns. As my critic mentioned, "you're not letting them stay for "free", you're letting hikers punt financial responsibility to someone else...it's not free for the trail angel." He's right. Hikers never seem to clock the fact that they'll gladly spend $200 on a resupply, $100 on town meals and drinks, and drop thousands on gear, but expect lodgings and gas to be comped because they're hikers. I've seen a hiker gladly fork over donations for gear repairs, restaurants, and beers for their tramily, but get offended when their ride or host ask for gas money. It's a disconnect that isn't healthy or realistic. The idea that a trail angel in a busy town gets hundreds of requests for rides and accommodations every season doesn't enter the hiker's mind.

* There is a significant environmental impact. - While my critic didn't mention it, it occurs to me that I've heard many hikers talk about how their hike is "environmentally sound". But, is it? If you're asking for rides to avoid off trail miles or get you skipped to another section, you're still using gas. If you're not cramming three other hikers into a car with you, then that roundtrip's worth of gas, repeated 20-50 times a thru hike, is adding a significant amount of fuel to your carbon footprint. Water caches lead to trash and overuse because hikers congregate around them.

* Self reliance is deprioritized and contributes to safety risks. - With self reflection, this one concerns me most. Critics of water caches aren't wrong! Too many hikers are relying on water caches for refills instead of using them for emergency use. And, well-meaning trail angels who place large caches are potentially giving underprepared hikers a false sense of water security. Offering shelter and rides for free or very cheap leads to hikers having an over-reliance on someone else solving their problems. Am TAs really "helping" hikers by being unpaid travel agents, Uber drivers, or hotels? Or, are we just enabling?

I'll leave you with the final, most common critique that is worth consideration...and I think we, as Trail Angels, need to really self-reflect on this: "Hikers can do and did do this hiker before trail angels." This is actually valid. We've inserted ourselves as part of the community and part of the experience for something that isn't about us. We're not "necessary" - we're a convenience. Would the trail and it's users be better off if we didn't create a cushy safety net?

Conclusion: While I'm not going to stop being a TA, this criticism and self reflection was valuable and will impact my participation going forward. How do others feel about this? Should we scale back? What say you?