Tramping vs. Hiking
Jan. 9th, 2007 04:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
petardierIn the US, we call it hiking, but to New Zealanders, it's tramping. Is there a difference? Apart from the landscape, the major difference I've noted is that tramping requires filling your boots up with cold water at odd intervals.
At first, I thought this was due to some strange New Zealandish fetish for wet feet. The more likely explanation is that many trails cross rivers and streams with wide variations of depth and width. Bridges have to be built to survive high water, but where the water won't get high enough to absolutely require a bridge, there often won't be one. The New Zealand solution is to walk right through, boots and all.
Here in the Northeast, I've always been told make sure my socks were dry. It was an article of belief that hiking in wet socks would lead to blisters, athlete's foot, moral decay, and quite possibly Communism. I was highly dubious about the notion of simply walking through streams. I even took a pair of Teva sandals with me, intending to switch when circumstances permitted. In the event, however, I caved in to peer pressure and splashed right in along with everyone else.
I'm glad I did. It really is a blessing to be freed from dogma. It turns out that one can hike perfectly comfortably in wet wool socks - once you get used to the squishing. It seems wrong at first, but the water does seem to provide some cushioning. I'm not at all sure this stunt would work with cotton socks.
Note: wearing gaiters seems to keep your feet mostly dry till about half way across a 20 - 30 foot wide stream - just enough to give one a false sense of hope. They may help for shorter periods of immersion however. Boots with mesh panels in sides let the water in faster, but let it out faster too.
At first, I thought this was due to some strange New Zealandish fetish for wet feet. The more likely explanation is that many trails cross rivers and streams with wide variations of depth and width. Bridges have to be built to survive high water, but where the water won't get high enough to absolutely require a bridge, there often won't be one. The New Zealand solution is to walk right through, boots and all.
Here in the Northeast, I've always been told make sure my socks were dry. It was an article of belief that hiking in wet socks would lead to blisters, athlete's foot, moral decay, and quite possibly Communism. I was highly dubious about the notion of simply walking through streams. I even took a pair of Teva sandals with me, intending to switch when circumstances permitted. In the event, however, I caved in to peer pressure and splashed right in along with everyone else.
I'm glad I did. It really is a blessing to be freed from dogma. It turns out that one can hike perfectly comfortably in wet wool socks - once you get used to the squishing. It seems wrong at first, but the water does seem to provide some cushioning. I'm not at all sure this stunt would work with cotton socks.
Note: wearing gaiters seems to keep your feet mostly dry till about half way across a 20 - 30 foot wide stream - just enough to give one a false sense of hope. They may help for shorter periods of immersion however. Boots with mesh panels in sides let the water in faster, but let it out faster too.
