Urban Backpackers: The Results

Almost too close to call...

Earlier this week, as part of a series of New Zealand-inspired posts, I asked whether "urban backpackers"—tourists who load up trail-worthy backpacks for exotic journeys—should be classified as legit, BACKPACKER-style backpackers.

And, unlike the responses we received to our poll about whether indoor hiking was a good idea (uh, no), the small contingent of active readers who voted and commented on the veracity of the term urban backpackers are decidedly split (7 yeah vs 6 nay). Not to mention well spoken. And eloquent. Poetic almost. See their thoughts below.

Plus stay tuned for the next New Zealand installment on why separate trails for mountain bikers, hikers, and horses can be a wonderful idea. Especially if you're wearing Keds on a rented bike when it's raining in the pseudo rainforest. –Katie Herrell

READER THOUGHTS ON URBAN BACKPACKERS

Backpacking is about nature, wilderness, and the outdoors, not tourism on the cheap. "Urban backpacking" needs its own term.

Backpacking is a generic term. You can 'backpack' through a country or 'backpack' through the wilderness. As a corollary you can 'hike' or 'trek' without a backpack as well.

Backpacking is literally camping while trekking over long distance with only a backpack and its contents to support you. Urban backpacking is literally just cheap traveling with a backpacking backpack on. Buying a large backpack isn't backpacking!

Some of the urban dangers I've encountered would rival those in the wilderness! Hey... seeing the world is seeing the world.

Putting a backpack on a tourist doesn't make him a backpacker any more than putting a daypack on a student makes him a day hiker. From what I can tell, "urban backpackers" carry backpacks simply because backpacks are more convenient than suitcases. "Urban backpacking" (which desperately needs its own identity instead of trying to horn in on an existing activity's terminology) is a "travel and tourism" thing, where backpacking is more of an outdoor sports activity. I don't believe there's truly enough cross-over in the goals, techniques, gear, etc. to classify urban and wilderness backpacking as the same activity in different settings. --Deborah

PRINT THIS PAGE EMAIL THIS PAGE RSS FEED

Digg Delicious Yahoo Facebook Reddit StumbleUpon Google Newsvine Facebook Twitter

READERS COMMENTS

the term for "urban back-packing" is called tramping.

but i guess thats more refred to the lifestyle of just going, just with a back pack. hitch hiking, touring etc
Posted: Dec 28, 2009 skye guy

If you are sleeping in a bed, you are not backpacking.
Posted: Mar 16, 2009 Tom the Traveller

This sounds a lot like the Everlasting A.T. Nonsense debate. It seems that there are these two hikers who have both walked the Appalachian Trail a stupid-huge number of times.

Hiker A says "I'm the king daddy. I've walked 30,000 miles on the AT. I rule."

Hiker B says "You suck! You didn't carry a pack! You're a slacker! I carry 70 pounds! My 20,000 miles count more!"

Everyone else pretty much seems to react with a "who are you two again?"

I love silly debates. Doesn't everyone?
Posted: Mar 11, 2009 FrankleeMiDeer

Why are "BACKPACKER"'s afraid of calling touring with a backpack, backpacking?
When I travel, I use the same principals I have learned in backpacking to streamline my travel weight, stay hygienic, and to keep my focus on enjoying my surroundings.
I also use the same exact gear.
Also, what I learned in travel, I use in backpacking, such as pack organization, and washing clothes.
If the principals, and the gear are the same, why shouldn't the name be as well?
Maybe it is the beds that tick you "hardcore backpackers off" :).
Posted: Mar 06, 2009 Micah

I'm cautious to only use the term "backpacking" when I truely am trekking a distance that includes overnight camping and living out of my backpack! Just as I wouldn't say car camping and backpacking are the same thing.
Posted: Mar 05, 2009 Jeff