I’m Over Calorie-Light Backpacking Meals

There are two universal truths in the world of backpacking: Food tastes better on the trail, and hiker hunger is real. Nothing works up an appetite quite like romping through the mountains for a few days. Walking uphill, carrying a loaded pack, a hiker can easily burn double the calories they would sitting at a desk.

Anyone who has wolfed down a post-hike burger, nachos, milkshake, fries, and still had room for more knows this. But there’s one group who hasn’t seemed to catch on to this phenomenon: backpacking meal companies.

Pre-packaged, dried dinners are a godsend for hikers, thanks to their convenience and packability, save for one fatal flaw: By and large, the serving suggestions on pouched meals are woefully inadequate for an average hiker’s actual caloric needs.

You may have noticed pouches that claim to “Serve two” never really satisfy a pair of hungry hikers. Some commercial backpacking dinners offer as few as 200 calories per serving. That’s less than a single Clif bar, and certainly enough to offset the caloric shedding of that last ridgeline scramble. A few of us on Backpacker’s staff have been known to carry two pouches for a single dinner—a purported four whole servings easily scarfed down by one hungry hiker.

Part of the problem? The Food and Drug Administration mandates a set of guidelines for nutrition labels, including the following statement: “Percent Daily Values are based on a 2,000 calorie diet.” This sum doesn’t take into account varying caloric needs based on factors such as body size and activity level. Many backpackers undertaking a strenuous trail will need to consume far more than 2,000 calories to replenish what they burn while hiking. But for companies to account for this while adhering to FDA standards, they’d end up with large and wonky percentages all the way down the nutrition label.

Backpacking meals are often touted for being light and compact. And it’s simply hard to pack lots of calories into a slim pouch, especially since calorie-dense ingredients like fats don’t dry well. For manufacturers to beef up the caloric punch of their meals, they’d need to sacrifice some amount of weight and packability. So, they thread the needle of serving sizes while fitting it all in a package that will appeal to the weight-conscious backpacker. Some brands add calories by including olive oil or peanut butter packets on the side. If you’re often hungry after finishing a backpacking meal, it’s a worthy strategy to consider.

A final theory: Small serving sizes help meal companies keep prices in the realm of reasonable. Consider this: A 500ish-calorie meal from popular brands like Backpacker’s Pantry or Good To-Go costs about $10—an easy sell. But brands know that hikers are unlikely to drop $20 for a single meal in a pouch, even if we claim to want more calories. There are plenty of backpacking meals out there that pack enough of a caloric punch to satisfy most hikers, but if you really want to be full from a single entree, you’ll likely have to shell out for the pricier meals.

Of course, I’m only speculating here. In the end, making sure your food needs are met on the trail just takes a bit of strategizing. Look beyond the serving suggestion, know yourself and your appetite, and pack according to your caloric needs and the hike you’re taking on. I, for one, don’t mind supplementing my freeze-dried dinner with more than a little dessert.