Is the Te Araroa Trail a con?

"Is it a con?" I think definitely not on the part of those who pioneered it or the volunteers who work on it. I was piecing together a route to tramp from Ship Cove to Bluff long before Te Araroa was finished (and before I was aware the idea of it existed). I donated to Te Araroa in its early stages thinking that it might make my goal achievable. I wasn't looking for a track that would pass through all the best SI scenery - I'm happy to do multiple other trips over many years for that. I was after an epic Journey from the top to the bottom of the South Island. I wasn't planning to walk alone, and if we didn't see anyone else along the trail that would have heightened the experience for us. So for me Te Araroa isn't a con. Perhaps how it is marketed overseas is? Perhaps people aren't getting the right information about what to expect? Doesn't mean it's a con though. Someone said it above - we need to change people's expectations, not change our tracks to fit their expectations.

I've just come back from a night at Double Hut. Met 3 TA trampers there - one who was doing the whole lot, and 2 who were doing sections as part of a wider NZ trip. From France and the USA. They had no complaints about the trail, two of them had crossed the Rakaia in low flow, and they all seemed to be having a great time. They said A Frame hut to Double Hut was very hard (tussock crevasses). The guy doing the whole trail - Clement - had counted 75 other people doing the trail. So I think it is becoming a lot more popular. I've seen the same just from reading the hut books at Double and Manuka huts. They had variously walked the JMT, the PCT and the AT. The JMT apparently is completely off-road and away from civialisation (there are 2 locations where food can be sent). None of them had complaints about the TA. They had researched it, and were enjoying the NZ countryside and huts. We shared our food and our wine with them, and when we saw two of them later the next day walking along the Hakatere Heron Road, we gave them a lift to the next part of the trail. And that is both the challenge, and the problem. The JMT is 340km and avoids civilisation.. The AT is 3500km and does feature roads and towns. The PCT is 4286km and avoids civilisation. The TA is 3000km and does feature roads and towns. Now I've never heard that the AT is a con :) But then again I haven't searched that hard - perhaps some people are disappointed with it. And I don't know how much roads and towns it has, and if thats the same percentage as the TA. The TA wants to be "the best walking trail in the world" and to showcase all of NZ including cities. It states on its website "It is a different kind of trail from the traditional back-country tramping tracks. " I don't know how its marketed abroad, but an immediate assumption would be that NZ+LOTR+fantastic countryside+wild=trail like the JMT/AT/PCT. Looking at blogs and forums may refine that idea to include rough+some road walking and cities. Or it may not. This is the same thought process I'd have if I was going to hike those US trails. And I would do my research. But the original question about the TA being a con is a good one. As trampers, I'm sure we all have our own version of the perfect NZ thru-hike. And I think it would be similar to what we have heard about or experienced on the US long trails, and would be an extension of the tramps we enjoy each weekend. Mine would be all back country trails, huts to stay in or camp near, otherwise rivers / lakes to camp near. Seeing some of the great NZ sights along the way (but only if it didn't take me too close to civilisation). Enough people on the trail to provide company along the way, and at huts. The opportunity to meet locals and learn more about NZ. A way to call ahead for transport across dangerous sections (Rakaia and Rangitata). And a way to resupply every so often, grab a shower etc. So could this be done in NZ? 1. Continuous back country trail - could this be achieved? TA hasn't done it but perhaps that wasn't their aim 2. Huts and back country campsites (i.e. camp anywhere) - achievable if on DOC land 3. Great NZ sights - depends on trail. Remember we are staying away from towns and cities. Arthur's pass and Mount Cook village would be OK in my opinion. Or should the great NZ sights be the back country scenery (Hakatere basin, Mt Potts etc) rather than the "tourist attractions". 4. Enough people on the trail. Build it and they will come - which seems to be happening now. Plus if existing back country trails are used then locals will be encountered on the trail. 5. Opportunity to meet locals. Stay in a mixture of back country (A-frame and Comyns) and front-country (Double and Manuka) huts and you will meet a good selection of hardened trampers, family groups and MTBers. 6. Way to call ahead for transport. I'm sure this could be arranged for a fee. 7. Way to resupply, grab a shower. Initially this seems to be an issue. How can this be done? Would the trail need to go near towns and villages? Will NZ Post hold your fuel parcel? Will DOC? Could you pay a fee at a commercial lodge for showers etc? What are other people's thoughts on this? Will the TA ever morph to become this? Or do we need a true back country trail - an NZ version of the PCT.

First its impossible to avoid Wellington and Picton on a trail the length on NZ. At the Wn end once you get to the Hutt river you can walk all the way to the Northern end of the Tararua without road or private land crossing but from there it gets hard to avoid roads and private land. Picton end is worse in this regard. Private land is the biggest obstacle to your dream.

So could this be done in NZ? 1. Continuous back country trail - could this be achieved? - Well. East Cape to Wellington had about 35km of dirt road and 28km of highway. Picton to Wanaka had 15km of road all up, most of it highway. Wanaka to West Cape/Cape Pursegur (spelling?) would have 0km. Sorting out a legal foot route from the Whirinaki to Clements Mill Rd would eliminate 35km of the NI highway stuff - the bush is there - but is private. Legal access direct to Mt Frith from Picton would resolve half of the SI stuff. So yes, you _can_ currently traverse NZ with minimal road, and _could_ do it with 0km of road travel with a bit of work, landowners cooperation permitting. BUT: A true NZ traverse is currently a dream / challenge / goal / ambition for those willing to do their research, hone their skills and go for it. I'd be devastated if it became another 'start here, disengage brain, and follow the little markers' tourist trail. What would be left as a challenge then?

Madpom, that's a very interesting observation. I think the TA may have already become that. Speaking to the TA hikers this weekend, they said that there were a few stories of hikers missing the orange makers, and heading to dead ends and having to double back. They also said that there were sections where the track markers were sparsely placed, and in those sections they followed the river or other logical track clue. I was also showing them my Topo50 map of the area, and showing them the TA trail on it. One of them said it looked like a very good map. The above points make me think that 1. Some TA hikers are just following the little markers 2. Some of them don't invest in detailed maps of the areas of the trail 3. Some of them don't know how to navigate visually or to use a map and compass In no way am I referring to the guys I met at the weekend. They seemed to be switched on, and knew where they needed to go. And its not meant as a criticism of TA hikers - I can navigate by comparing visual features to the Topo map, but need to improve my compass skills. Its not just a TA issue either. I'm currently watching "Mile, Mile and a Half" which is about hiking the JMT. People miss the track markers, go different ways to the rest of the party etc. In fact, its not a TA or JMT issue - I'm sure the same thing happens on tramping and hiking trips every weekend :) Is it a trap that is easy to fall into. Follow the orange markers - the trail is marked and goes that way. The walk becomes strenuous. Concentrate on getting there and because the trail is marked I don't have to think about navigation. Mmm - where was the last marker? Is this marker the one for my trail? And so on ... Unless you've been taught, or learnt, to compare current and planned surroundings against a map, its an easy trap to fall into. In terms of tourist trail vs back country challenge, I think the TA has plans to gradually remove the road sections. This connects to the MSC conversation. and to back country safety overall. Will the TA become the Alpine Crossing of long trails? I know the US long trails have a similar problem - just look at the coversations about inexperienced tarp users on BPL

From conversations in the TAT facebook group, it's not uncommon for people to combine the trail notes (probably only a section of them printed at a recently visited backpackers) with maps on electronic devices like phones and tablets. The TAT website also provides some reasonable topo maps which follow the trail as PDFs. I don't know what portion of TAT walkers make use of that, but even then the it looks as if the trail sometimes goes near the end of those maps, plus map quality can only be as good as the print ability from some random accommodation along the way, or the screen quality of your device. I'm uneasy about going anywhere, in the back-country sections, without a proper paper map (usually also not one I've printed myself), at least as a backup for when my quick-reference maps and aides are inadequate. At the same time I'm getting wary of jumping too deeply into discussions about reliance on electronic devices. It leads back to arguing about what is the "right" way to do things, and that can quickly become personal. In the end, maps and compasses and GPSs and cellphones and altimeters and the surrounding environment and other navigational aids are only as useful as the skills a person has for using them effectively. Rather than telling people which equipment they should have for the TAT, it's probably at least as meaningful to discuss what skills they should have, and the skills will lead to the equipment that's needed. So which skills are, or should be, needed for TAT? And which skills are less important because the Trust is aiming to compensate for people who mightn't have them? The skills question for the TAT was a big thing during the argument about whether to cut a new track along Oriwa Ridge in the Tararuas. The Trust was saying they didn't want to expose walkers to the top of the Main Range (the most likely alternative), yet one of the big arguments put in favour of sending people along the Main Range was that the TAT was already routed through some comparably exposed areas further south.

I accept a trail this long isnt going to cater for everyone, theres likely to be some road bashing, but theres far too much in the TA for my liking... sure its nice to go down the wanganui river but then you have to road bash all the way to the Tararuas... because a river trip was put in it... i'm not a fan of long walks on farmland either. i didnt expect it to end up being a hard out trampers dream trip, but theres far too much of it isnt real tramping for my liking...

Yeah. Met a few in kawekas doing what appears to be an increasingly popular varient through there and Ruahines. Can't blame 'em for avoiding all that flat road 'n farming stuff. Now - if they wanted a kayak, i'd have sent them down the Clutha. Now that'd be a good historic/cultural experience for them. Few dams to portage, but hey - keeps it interesting. Then along the old rail line to Owaka. Then a sodden slog through the Catlans which tourists must love as they constantly rave to me about it (like to see them possumming it in winter for day after rainy day), ending at the southernmost point in nz - which is nowhere near Bluff anyway. All of which would have the coincidental side effect the eyres, taki's and longwoods get spared from the tourist masses. Which suits me. And isn't that what matters?

sure its nice to go down the wanganui river but then you have to road bash all the way to the Tararuas... because a river trip was put in it... Why not loop back up the Waitotora. Only adds another 100km or so

All the road walking on TA is a turnoff for me but yes I understand they are working on eliminating some of this. At Koiteata campsite last year I met a guy who'd spent a very hot day walking from Whanganui city the whole way to Turakina and then down to the coast on the roads. He said it was very dangerous in the busy traffic where the shoulder was narrow on SH3. This and other long road walks he'd done on the way south to me was time wasted when he could have been doing something more interesting. I've cherry picked the bits of TA that interest me but if I had the time that it takes to complete TA to invest in tramping most of it would be spent away from the TA route where there is abundant interesting country and less people. I guess TA is satisfying for those with a goal of completing the whole thing and that some enjoy the social & cultural aspects. However much of it is not through NZ's better tramping country. Too much road walking & too much pastoral country!