The Cato to Fair Haven Trail, Cayuga County, NY

You might think that the Cato-Fair Haven trail is just a mosquito-infested ATV superhighway through a swamp, and, in reality, that's pretty much what it is. As far as 'hikes' go it's a miserable road march with only a couple of mud puddles to break up the flat, straight monotony of it all. However, if you ever wanted to walk through a swamp, without actually getting in the swamp, this is a great walk.

Once you resign yourself to the fact that your 'hike' on a 'trail' is really a walk down a narrow road filled with Shriner vehicles you can take in the natural beauty along the way, and, really, there's a bit to see.

My advice is to ditch the hiking boots and just wear sneakers or light walking shoes -- and load up on bug repellant.

Finger Lakes Fungi

Some handsome specimens I found along the Finger Lakes Trail (Spring 2013)

Spring 2013 on and around the Finger Lakes Trail

Spring 2013 on and around the Finger Lakes Trail

Mariposa State Forest 

Tuller Hill State Forest

Otselic State Forest

Heiberg Memorial Forest 

Hoxie Gorge

Beaver Creek

Zamberlan Lagorai

I wonder if a finer boot has been made? The Zamberlan Lagorai represents the pinnacle of first rate materials and workmanship -- truly, these boots are a thing of wonder. Yet, you already know all this. What I want to address is, what turned out for me, their weird sizing. I bought a pair of these Lagorai but only wore them about six hours before I had to admit that they just weren't going to work out.

If you've been reading the online consumer reviews concerning these boots then you've seen comments to the effect that they are sized about a half size larger than stated. It's actually weirder than that. I wear a 13 in virtually all hiking boots but can easily get away with a pair of 14s with heavy socks -- indeed, I'm a happy owner of two pairs of Lowa in size 14 so I thought these in 13 would be perfect. However, the Lagori (and from what I can ascertain, the entire NW line) doesn't actually provide a 13.5" boot when the label says 13" -- they're more like 13" with regard to the toe box and 15 in the heel.

The amount of heel lift with these boots was really excessive with thin, medium, heavy, and even extra-heavy mountaineering socks from Darn Tough. The only time I could eliminate most of the slippage was with my thickest socks and laced up so tight that they became torture chambers. There was just no way to make them fit. I couldn't go down to a pair of 12s because 'boot bang' was going to be an issue. Pretty disappointing to say the least. But definitely give the Lagorai a spin because if you find a pair that fit you're in for a real treat.

Smartwool Vs. Darn Tough Hiking Socks

I've been using Darn Tough socks for a long time but recently tried out a pair of the ironically named "Smartwool" heavy duty hiking socks. They cost a few bucks less and the online hype / reviews were good so it seemed like a good idea.

Bad idea.

I tried out the Smartwool socks on a 12 mile snowshoeing tour up Labrador 'Mountain' (really, just a big hill) nearly Tully, NY. across Kettlebail Forest and a ways into Heiberg Memorial Forest. After about 6 miles I notified Houston that we had a problem and, indeed, another mile down the trail and I had developed my first blister in 27 years.

These socks are poorly woven, floppy, baggy, do not hold their form, and after a few miles already started to unravel. By contrast, my last pair of Darn Tough have seen over 400 miles and have been through the wash approximately 15 or 20 times, are still tight, dense, thick, and soft.

So, I wore the Smartwool socks for a little over 10 miles and washed them once:

The result is a semi-formless blob of wool that is coming apart.

These things will be okay for people keeping their toes warm in the living room or for those who 'hike' a few miles a day but they're not contenders for serious trekking or backpacking.

Pay the extra $5 and go with a pair of Darn Tough wool socks.

MSR Evo and Evo Ascent Snowshoes

Looking for lightweight snowshoes that can handle virtually any situation? The MSR Evo and Evo Ascent models are intriguing snowshoes for those looking for otherworldly traction.

The shoes themselves are 22" in length -- perfect for light snow, traversing ice, hill work, etc., and when the snow gets deep and/or the weight of your backpack goes up you can attach flotation tails which extend the shoe out to 28", enough support for 250 lbs.

However, in my experience, getting those tails attached once the attachment points are iced over can be pretty tough. You'll need a way to melt the ice off or use something like a small wire-bristle brush to scrape them free. The last time I used the tails it took more than five minutes to accomplish what should be a very quick and easy task.

The Evo and Evo Ascent are basically the same shoe with the latter having one extra strap for a total of four in addition to 'Televators' which enable you to raise your boot heel such that climbing steep hills feels like climbing stairs. They are easy to engage and disengage and really work well (a simple twist of the metal will disengage one side and then reverse twist and the other side is unlocked). I only use the 'Televators' for long, continuous ascents because you can find yourself wearing 'high heels' once the terrain flattens out and engaging and disengaging frequently is a pain in the neck. But when the situation calls for these heel-risers (for me about 5% of the time) they are really nice to have.

And speaking of climbing, both the Evo and Evo Ascent versions are real champs when it comes to extraordinary traction. My first use of the Ascent shoes was bushwhacking a steep face of Labrador Mountain near Tully, NY -- at spots greater than 60 degree angles with snow drifting more than two feet. I managed 900 feet of elevation according to my GPS in about 30 minutes. A guy trying to follow in my tracks admitted defeat after floundering around in a traditional pair of Tubbs. While I was standing on top of Lab Mt he was getting back in his car.

And traversing tough sections is made easier with all the extra traction; I traversed this section in Heiberg Memorial Forest in less than a minute by just hopping across all the fallen trees.

Is it worth the extra money to get the Ascent Evos? If you're going to be sticking (and you will stick) to gentle and rolling hills then save yourself the $50 or $60 and get the regular Evos but if you aspire to climb hills then the extra money for the Ascent versions are well worth the extra expense.

The one frequent complaint of the Evo line is their noise. Put simply, Evos are the flip flops of the snowshoe world: once you get a good head of steam built up you'll generate loud clip-clops like a horse and on crusty, icy snow they are very, well, crunchy sounding -- the decks actually amplify the sound of crunchy ice almost like a drumhead. If you're into hunting or wildlife photography (i.e., entering an area as silently as possible) these would probably be the worst shoe possible. However, in fresh, deeper powder they are nice and quiet unless you are really flying along.

If you're going to be crossing streams or traversing through areas featuring a lot of groundwater seepage up you will have to de-ice the traction rails and crampon frequently which means poles are not optional: you'll be knocking the these shoes to get the ice off -- otherwise they will double their weight in seconds of crossing a stream.

The other concerns I have are (1) after a few weeks the metal binding parts began to rust on all my Evo snowshoes. The performance is not diminished but you'd expect better; (2) after 50 miles of use an intermittent squeak developed in the left shoe and, after 75 miles the squeak is now acute. Have some white lithium grease on hand to solve this problem.

All in all, however, the Evo and Evo Ascent are good choices for people looking to trek across varied terrain with maximum traction. I would buy them again and would recommend them to others.

Pros: lightweight, sturdy, secure, best traction possible
Cons: noisy, oxidizing metal, clumsy tail attachment under icy conditions

In Defense of the Big Heavy Hiking Boot

The Ultralight (UL) Era has been gaining momentum for years and the ethic of lightweight and ultralight backpacking seems to have gained the upper hand when it comes to choosing footwear. Big heavy boots are out and trail runners are in. But here's the deal: a lot of folks are being recommended UL and lightweight hiking and trail running footwear when they are not ideal candidates for such gear.

It's become an almost knee-jerk reaction to simply recommend any number of UL and lightweight shoes and boots for people who are carrying base weights well in excess of what light travelers aim for; many folks setting out to engage in more traditional camping and backpacking activities are, perhaps, being steered in the wrong direction.

Here's what Ultralight hiking and backpacking actually consists of: a base weight of roughly 12 pounds or less. If you're carrying a tent, a stove, sleeping bag, pad, etc., you're not really going UL and putting trail runners on your feet may represent the wrong tool for the job.

Let's think about it from the perspective of distances you want to hike per day:

If you're aiming for 25-35 miles per day for many days on end you will need to go UL and you will need UL footwear. However, if you're aiming at 20 miles or less per day and want to travel with some degree of comfort (more than a bare-bones kit) or even 'luxury' items then you're not going UL and trail runners are not really the footwear that best meet your needs.

Geography and weather are also considerations. If you're aiming to hike or backpack over varied terrain in all four seasons, the classic "big heavy boot" is still the king of the trail. They're chunky and heavier for a number of reasons: thicker and wider outsoles for better stability and greater load-bearing qualities; thicker treads for superior traction in rough conditions; enhanced ankle support; thick leather for abrasion resistance and possibly a Goretex liner for dealing with moisture; burly lacing systems for customizing fit; rubber toe rands for saving leather and feet from sharp rocks and so on.

If your goal for the year is put a couple hundred miles behind you with minimal gear or aiming for hundreds of miles during a single through-hike then you might be the right person to go with some trail runners but if you're a section or thru-hiker carrying, say, 30 pounds or more of gear for 12 to 20 miles per day then you might be better served with some trekkers. I've worn a lot of shoes and boots but as the miles grew longer and the loads became heavier I decided it was better to 'graduate' up from shoes and light hikers and just go with trekking boots that I could wear year-round slogging through deep mud, plowing through snow with snowshoes, crossing shallow creeks and streams, stumbling over wet tree roots, bushwhacking, as well as striding the well-worn path.

But they're big and heavy! Yeah, but you will adapt. It takes a couple of weeks to build your legs up in order to adapt to the additional weight but I think a good pair of trekking boots represent the best all-season solution to hiking and backpacking footwear. They're going to cost more and take longer to break in but I think you save money in the long run and they will keep you on the trail longer.

The "big heavy boot" does not represent an anachronistic holdover from an earlier era of hiking and backpacking -- they are still very much the right tools for a lot of people.

Hiking with Slowpokes

I like to hike with others but sometimes you get a person who consistently lags behind, frequently stopping for any number of reasons, and generally "dragging ass" as we put it in the Marines. I'm all for enjoying the scenery and taking my time to bask in the glory of nature, but when 'hiking' becomes 'standing around a lot' it kills the vibe.

Let's break this up into two separate issues: the slow and the stopping.

First, perform some rational self-evaluation: are you asking people to hike faster than what is expected of the average person? Average hiking speed is only 2mph. Hiking uphill is a lot slower than that. Be realistic. If your slowpoke is in poor physical condition you can't expect much from them. Why are you hiking with people in poor physical condition and expecting them to perform as if they were in shape?

If you're not asking too much, have the slowest person walk point; for some reason they feel a bit more psychological 'pressure' from those behind them and will speed up a bit -- this will also reduce the number of stops.

Engaging in conversation with slowpoke will also create a psychological tether that will help keep the group together.

How do you get a person to eliminate some of their frequent stops? Teach them the 'Rest Step' technique. I'm okay with a person who is 'slow' but continuous, it's the constant stopping that drives me nuts. The Rest Step can really make things better.

Give your human anchor clear objectives, e.g., "We'll stop for water in 15 min...", etc. Sometimes people get the sense that there is no 'end' in sight and they become discouraged. Also, advise them not to keep looking up at the top of the hill they are trying to ascend and emphasize "one foot in front of the other."

On the level of equipment, proper use of trekking poles can really, really improve performance. Again, the key is on proper use of the poles. A lot of folks work against themselves by not using their poles correctly.

What does not work: yelling at them or any other form of aggressive behavior.

Further, if this is a constant problem, you may need to delve into Mr or Mrs Snailspace's motivations for hiking; the frequent stopper may be exhibiting a kind of passive aggressive behavior due to the fact that they want to spend time with you but they don't really care anything about hiking.

However, be patient. A person who wants to be with you and is going hiking as a means for increasing time with you may develop a passion for hiking and backpacking so long as you don't turn it into a grueling slog.