Kalalau Articles

March 17, 2008 | In Hiking |

I’m running out of titles for Kalalau-related content. I could update the Kalalau Trip Reports with the following links, but these are more newsy than pure hiking stories.

• First, two old articles about volunteer repairs to the trail last summer and fall. These repairs took place after my previous hike and photos of trail conditions, and I haven’t hiked the trail since to see what changed.

  I’m ambivalent about these repairs. In my mind the trail was passable before, so the work is probably cosmetic to make it look safer. I don’t mean to belittle all the work done, but I do worry about the soundness of the amateur repairs. In other words, if the volunteer did widen the trail with masonry work, only time will tell if it holds up to repeated use. On the other hand, I know some people were intimidated by the trail conditions, and it’s unfortunate when that takes away from the experience. And some repairs by the state tend to be shoddy, and all trails are temporary in the grand scheme of things, so it is more likely a good thing to have the repairs done.

  Interestingly, the first article mentions the need for archeology studies prior to trail work by the state. I know that the state has strict rules and maybe the fact is that being a historical trail itself that crosses some archaeological sites triggers the studies for any work. But I also wonder if they might realign sections of the trail and therefore make sure they aren’t disturbing new sites. In any case, I’m curious to see the repaired trail sections and any plans for the new trail work.

• Then, not to scare anyone, here’s a recent first-hand account of a minor accident on the trail that could’ve been much worse. The author doesn’t say where the accident happened, but there aren’t many switchbacks with view of Kalalau near Hanakoa, so I assume it’s the small valley just at the exit of Hanakoa valley, before the balcony trail. The location is important to me, because I’d be interested in knowing if the eroded trail condtion contributed to the accident, and given that the trail in that area is in poor shape, I’d have to hypothesize it was at least a factor.

  Then, of course, I need to discuss how the hiker could’ve avoided the accident. Although she mentions hiking experience, it didn’t sound too extensive to me. If you go backpacking once a year, chances are you don’t go on difficult trails. Kalalau is a difficult trail, but it can still be done by breaking it over 2 days, especially now that Hanakoa is open for camping near the midpoint and before the eroded sections. She admits that continuing past Hanakoa was overexerting herself. The other lesson, I suppose, is to not be too distracted by the views, and always secure your pack and your own footing when you stop to take pictures, drink, etc.

  I do not fault the hiker for going alone, I think that is still a freedom that should not be discouraged, though you must be aware of the safety aspects in exchange. In the case of the Kalalau trail, this story shows that the risks of hiking alone are not that much greater, given the number of people who do stop to help. People gave assistance and got the word to her family, and rescue personnel hiked in to escort her out. It seems like the system, both formal and informal, for rescuing people works well. There was a similar story in 2006, where an informal chain of good samaritans carried out an injured swimmer by boat (the injuries were much worse, but the person was also doing some extreme off-trail rock-climbing).

• Last, and surprisingly least interesting, is a feature article in National Geographic about the Na Pali coast, including the Kalalau trail. I haven’t seen the print edition yet, but I find the text of the article to be disappointing, and the photos and maps don’t work for me in any browser. The one picture and the thumbnails of the others look impressive, so it seems more like a way of getting pretty pictures into the magazine than a real attempt at covering the issues. I do like their map however, National Geographic always has nice maps:
  
  Source: National Geographic

  Starting with the obvious comparison to Shangri-La and giving only brief and inaccurate explanations of geology and Hawaiian culture, the article mostly centers around the writer’s trek on the trail. And there, predictably, the difficulty is exaggerated, the valley resisdents are stereotyped, and the story of Koolau the leper is told once again. Then the writer goes on to say how the campground is trashed and the ambiance ruined by a boombox. Granted, the “vibe” of the place can change from year to year, and maybe the trash is far more noticeable than when I was there last, but it sounds like the author had unrealistic expectations.

  I am reminded of another misguided travel article about the trail, though not as amateurish because it is, after all, National Geographic. I guess I just have to ask: if a journalist interviews a few people and then writes an article about their vacation, do they get to write the whole thing off as expenses?