Is the Te Araroa Trail a con?

it goes from one extreme to another, from very easy walking to demanding alpine environments, but it doesnt really advertise well the nature of the difficulties and sometimes it attracts people not experienced enough to cope well with the trail

Fantastic thread everyone. A very thoughtful range of contributions. I basically agree with izogi, the TAT is emphatically NOT a very long tramping trip. It's a trail in the spirit of the AT, or PCT - with it's own unique character. And one that Geoff Chapple and his extraordinary band of volunteers can be very proud of. Unquestionably land access issues (and New Zealand has a poor track record in this respect) forced them into compromises which have impacted on some sections of it. I would hope that over time some of these deficient sections will be improved. I still harbour hopes of doing the TAT myself someday. Having said that - I'm also with madpom when he says that a full tramping style traverse of both Islands remains a serious challenge that I would be loath to see 'packaged' into a 'follow the orange marker' style trip. Leave this adventure untouched and untamed for the generations who follow us. Somewhere in between these two ideas there may be space for a TAT Mk2 that embraces more of the classic tramping style challenge - but without unwarranted exposure to dangerous alpine conditions. I'm thinking of a link up of existing tramping routes, starting perhaps in Coromandel and ending in say Te Anau. More focus on the quality and variety of landscapes rather than traversing the length of the country for the sake of it. And accept that it may not be possible to make the route officially continuous. If nothing else it would make for a fascinating desktop exercise.

I've just been walking the sections from St Arnaud to Boyle Village over the last week and all of the TaT people were generally very happy with the trail. They liked the South Island better than the North Island (too much road walking there). I was walking with a mixed group of European and Canadian hikers and although they thought the track was a bit undeveloped in places they actually quite liked that. One German guy who had walked the PCT and AT thought that they were too easy by comparison with the TaT. What they did want though were better transport options between sections as apart from hitchhiking they are very poor.

Hi. I'm an Aussie who moved to the West Coast of SI a year ago. Having badly shattering my leg just two weeks after moving here, it set me back in getting stuck into the brilliant tramping that is endless here in NZ! However, I'm up and running now. I had been planning to enter the 2016 Coast to Coast, but after pricing it all out, it was going to cost over $5000 (kayak, bike, kayaking course etc etc). A lot of dosh for a 1 or 2 day event! Of course, I had heard of the Te Araroa Trail, and all the mixed reviews as evidenced in this thread. I love nothing more than smashing myself in remote regions. But that's not what I expect of the TAT. Not all of it, at least. Having read all the track notes, I think the only part I'm really disappointed in is that it passes through Auckland. I wish the trail would avoid it. However, it's part of the journey as it currently stands. And last night, I decided that later this year I'm taking 3-4 months off to do the TAT. It'll still cost over $5K, but a much better investment, in my opinion. When I first visited NZ 10 years ago, I did a crazy, whirlwind $15 000 (for two of us) trip of both islands. Saw a lot, obviously missed a lot. The TAT will be a great opportunity to simply slow down, and take in a variety of NZ sites before getting too ensconced in my new career. And then I can spend the rest of my life experiencing NZ's true wilderness gems. Is it a con? Nope. Like any experience; what you put into it - and with what attitude - is what you get out of it. Regardless, walking 3000km is an achievement, and I would hope that NZ trampers don't blemish people's experience by telling TAT hikers that it's a farce.

Kreig ~ I'm planning on doing the TA late this year. Hopefully catch you at some point.

Yeah mate, I saw your thread. Provided I get the time off work, I'll see you out there! I thought about replying, but at the end of the day, I want to hike predominantly alone. Of course, I will embrace the wonderful, almost instant kinship felt when I run into other TAT hikers, but for me it's more about the inner journey. And at least I know solo hiking here won't get me killed by wild animals! :D Back home in Oz, not two weeks before moving to NZ, I almost stepped directly on the head of red belly black snake. This is just one of many close shaves I've had with deadly snakes. I was actively hunted by a pack of dingoes in the Western Australian desert, and only escaped by illegally breaching a mine site. I solo-hiked 160km of virgin Cambodian jungle just a stone's throw from the Vietnamese border. Apparently, I could've blown myself up. :D So solo-hiking the TAT isn't a difficult choice. I won't die from wild animals. Sandflies are a pain in the arse, but they don't eat much. ;) I'm not at risk of blowing myself up (or getting shot, if hunters follow correct practices). I won't die of dehydration. Not in this country. No one ever really dies of starvation. Exposure is obviously the big killer here; and that comes down to being prepared. It takes up a bit of room in my pack, but when solo tramping here I carry an arctic suit, good to minus 80 degrees. The bonus is with that I can get away with just the lightest of sleeping bags. ;) River crossings are a risk, but I have swift water training, and operate in swift water almost daily. I have no fear of what I might come across on a riverbank; if there's any doubt, I'll camp up, or backtrack if required. I'd be interested in perhaps paddling the Straight, if weather permitted and I had a partner for that stretch. A true end-to-end! Bamboo, I admire your goal of volunteering as you go. It's very admirable! Unfortunately, I won't have the time (getting the 3-4 months off is going to be a hard sell as it is). But I volunteer on a weekly basis with youth here back home. In fact, I'm partly doing this for them.

not sure about the -80 artic suit. Thats 40 more than the lowest ever recorded temperature in NZ. Put that on in the southern alps in winter and you will be medium rare in 1 hour and well done another 30 min later.

Yeah, I wondered about that, but because it's not fully enclosed (arm/leg holes), I find I can regulate my temp quite nicely.

@Kreig. Ha - and I'm an old kiwi tramper whose stuck in Australia. Been here about 18 months and I'm not yet inspired to go walkabout. First of all - work has definitely gotten in the way, and secondly the summer climate is just way too difficult. And then there is the landscape itself. It still feels alien, it just doesn't draw me in the way the mountains do at home. Plus all the ants, snakes and spiders that want to have a go at you. I'm just aware that I'm not calibrated to look out for them. Not a show-stopper, but definitely something I'm uncomfortable with. And up until just now I hadn't even thought about the dingoes! An old mate of mine (a geologist) explained that - to a first approximation - nothing much has happened in Australia for about the last 300m years; whereas everything in NZ took place in the last 25m. The two countries could hardly be more different in so many ways.

Yeah exactly Phillip. So incredibly different! However, the biggest killer (as far as outdoor pursuits go), is the same in both countries; exposure. It's just that in Oz it's high temperatures, and here it's low. Yes, getting used to the idea that things can kill is a bit of a mind-bender. However, rest assured that whilst I've had some rather harrowing experiences, these are usually in very harsh, remote places, whilst alone. Snakes kill - on average - only 2 people a year in Australia. Not bad considering all the deadly Joe Blakes around! And the last person to die of a spiderbite in Australia was in 1979. I'd recommend that when you're due for a first aid refresher, you ask the instructor to spend some time on dealing with venomous bites/stings etc, as well as preparing for the harsh landscape and inevitable lack of water you'll often be faced with. Australia has a huge trail as well, the Bicentenial Trail. It my opinion, it's a much more potentially dangerous trail than the TAT. For one, you constantly need to be aware of where your next water is coming from. Throw in the wildlife, and the bushfires, not to mention if you hit the high country in winter, you will still have to consider cold temperatures and snow as well as the heat of the north. Tough gig that one. However, if you want to do - in my opinion - the best long distance trail in Australia, head to WA to do the Bibbulmun Track. It's extremely well maintained and thought-out, with huts spread evenly over the 1000km trail. And it covers some pretty diverse terrain. Love that trail! There are others around, of course. All over that wide brown land. If you want something to remind you of home, head to Tassie. The only difference is you still have to worry about snakes. ;) Anyway, I could go on and on about Aussie hiking. Where abouts are you based?