Solo Tramping

Should you tramp solo? 

A lot of my trips are off-track and solo which some will think is unacceptably risky and irresponsible.  To a degree they are right and it's worth taking some time to think carefully about the risks and benefits if you’re inclined to tramp solo.  

Exposure to risk

The Risk Management page goes into more detail, but in summary, my view is that the solo tramper is possibly at slightly higher risk of an incident but at significantly high risk of a severe outcome.

This is because we forego the protections that a group can provide in terms of, for example, additional resources, observational and analytical capacity, and support when something goes wrong. 

Managing risk

For self preservation, a solo tramper should practice sound and conservative risk management if they want to become an old tramper with all limbs and faculties intact. 

There are also social reasons to practice sound and conservative risk management.  When something goes wrong a bunch of people will turnout to help, expending personal time and state funds and putting themselves at risk. There will also be people that are exposed to emotional harm through distress when someone is missing and if the worst transpires.

In light of the later, I think the solo tramper should feel some obligations to take reasonable steps to minimise the chance of a call out, e.g.:

• Develop skills before setting out on their own
• Assess risks before trips
• Leave detailed intentions with someone reliable 
• Record intentions in logbooks 
• Be conservative in taking risks
• Communicate changes in plan
• Carry a PLB

I.e. take actions to reduce the chance of something going wrong and increase the chance of being found quickly. 

Risk acceptability 

I'm clearly biased, but I think that our history shows that NZ society tolerates and in some cases admires those that have faced risks in exploring the outdoors.  From Maori trails across the Alps to mountaineers.  

I'm not comparing solo weekend warriors to Sir Ed, but I do think there is a degree to which the admiration of a spirit of adventure is part of the national psyche - even if it is wishful thinking akin to believing that we still have a strong number 8 wire mentality.

If a tramper requires rescue and has not followed the 'rules' though, that's another matter and just watch the media feeding the spluttering outrage about the cost to the taxpayer.

In other words, I think there is sufficient social acceptability to justify the decision to tramp solo provided you keep within your abilities and do due diligence in managing risk. 

Sharing the benefit

Tramping builds skills and gives enjoyment – in a group everyone benefits from sharing this.  By choosing to tramp solo I'm conscious that there's a small opportunity cost in not sharing these.  It's a personal thing, but I feel some obligation to try to redress the balance a little, as it is the broader outdoor community that will turnout if I get into trouble, and there are lots of people that volunteer to improve the outdoor facilities I use.  There are plenty of ways that solo trampers can socialise some of the benefits they get: help out through a club or meet-up group, track clearing, pest control, lead trips, volunteer to SAR ...

Summary

There's a bunch of stuff I haven't touched on here like how solo trampers model behaviours to others and relative environmental footprints in getting to road ends.  

But, in summary, I suggest the activity carries increased risk of severe negative and costly outcomes and is inherently somewhat selfish in that we individualise the benefits and socialise the risks.  However, I think the activity is within the bounds of what is socially acceptable if we mitigate the risks as much as practicable through careful risk management and look for opportunities to pay it back (or forward).