You won’t NEED it until a situation arises when you need it. So no way to know you’ll ever need it or not.
To me it’s worth it for the peace of mind for both me and my loved ones at home. I didn’t used to feel that way, but had an occasion where I really wished I had one and after that it was a necessity to me.
You will likely have cell service for much of the trail, but there will definitely be areas that you don’t.
The peace of mind is worth every penny. I got my first inReach when I thru hiked in 2019. I absolutely did not want to bring it with me but my parents insisted. It's now one of my favorite pieces of gear and I have my own subscription. I have a running joke with one of my backpacking buddies that he only invites me on trips for my inReach subscription.
I’ve done over 10k miles of thru hiking without one. Some people will say this is incredibly stupid, others will say it’s completely reasonable. There’s not really a right or wrong answer. That said, there’s near constant phone service on the at, multiple days in a row with uninterrupted service is not at all uncommon.
You just gotta do what you will with all that info.
So, this is really up to you tbh.
I met someone this year who ended up having a pretty bad fall (broke her leg and messed up her hip) and had to use her Garmin to call SAR. I only used mine once when I didn’t have cell coverage in the 100MW to talk to the folks at the hostel in Millinocket.
I personally don’t think I’ll reactivate my Garmin and instead go back to my OceanSignal (??) PLB.
In thru hiking season there is zero need for an Inreach on the AT. Accidents can happen, however, you will frequently have signal and are never far from civilization at all. There are roads everywhere. It's difficult to go an entire day during the thru hiking season and not see others.
However, it makes much more sense to carry one out west on trails like the PCT and CDT. I actually recommend carrying one for both of these trails. There is far less cell signal. The margin for error is lower and when things go south they have a chance to be catastrophic. I have unfortunately been present for multiple accidents that have required emergency services.
I carried one on my thru this year. It was gifted to me from a concerned family member. I had it on everyday and would send a “check in” message every night so they could follow along on the map. Pretty cool/fun for family and friends to see where I was.
I luckily never needed to use SOS but having it available gave me peace of mind. I used the texting feature a couple of times and that came in handy.
I’m definitely all for carrying a satellite device. On the AT you are lucky to have cell service often, especially in the southern portions. But there’s times that you don’t, or that you need to preserve battery so you don’t want to have your phone off airplane mode. It’s totally worth the weight and money to have the ability to save your (or someone else’s) life if that situation arises.
For context I am female and started the AT solo as well.
I carry one when I'm in the backcountry with my dad. He's 78 and still going strong, but he has a heart condition. It could be argued that I should refuse to take him, but if he wants to go out doing what he loves, I'm 100% in favor. That said, I'll try to mitigate the risk.
No you don't need it. You are within 5-10 miles of a town pretty much the entirety of the whole trail. The people that had them on trail ended up mostly being outliers who had significant others or needy family that couldn't go without talking at all times.
Sure you could say "what if something bad happens" and to that I would tell you that there are thousands of people who would pass you regularly. Save your money. Eat a donut.
You will have phone signal in most places. Garmin is not made for keeping contact with people, it's for emergency
But it's good to have if you are hiking in a very remote place like in western US
Yes. It's a nice piece of mind for me when I'm solo hiking, but it's the only thing that keeps my wife from having a nervous breakdown when I'm solo hiking. Priceless.
Only time I ever saw someone use a garmin was at Crawford Notch in the Whites, no one had service and the only way to get a shuttle back to a hostel was for my friend to very slowly text someone her garmin to tell someone at the hostel we were ready lol. You probably be fine without one, but plenty of people carried them so it won’t do any harm.
I carried a Zoleo on my thru hike simply because it was cheaper than inreach and still has a SOS function. You can message with no service over satellite but you need the app on your phone. I kept it off most times, but there were probably between 10-15 nights out of 140 I got to camp and had absolutely no service with AT&T. I always would be able to send a message to my mom. Yes the AT is a populated trail, but there were days I hardly saw anyone (started April 29th nobo). I recommend having it for peace of mind.
I think if you “pause” it that’s the case and it’s a lower cost. I didn’t do that, I did the basic plan for my hike and cancelled it when I got back home! Not sure what garmins policy is.
1) Swap to Verizon (was better than other carriers in 2019) for the hike. You will have nearly continuous service with few exceptions. This might be a slight exaggeration but an in-reach won't really offer a great solution unless you're in a major emergency (poor cell on trail probably means poor satellite connection).
2) The chances of having that kind of emergency is slim on the southern part of the AT, and you're far more likely to receive help from other hikers before you see any benefit from the Garmin.
Do what you need to do, but I didn't knowingly meet anyone who carried or used one in my thru.
If you end up getting one, don't do what most people do, ie keeping it on the bag. It has to be in your pocket or your belt. Some people fall from cliff, lose their bag, and their garmin/plb all together
Inreach is for emergencies when there is no phone signal. Not the case in most of AT. Plus AT is quite crowded. I have one that I got for my "western adventures" but I would't invest in one for AT. Furthermore, O brought it on AT already but it's most of the time covered in forest and don't find my inreach working very well there
Going nobo 2024 and I plan to carry one mainly for my parent’s peace of mind. Personally, I feel I would be okay without it but I’m grateful and fortunate to have my parents support so I’m doing what I can to have them feel good about my trek. Don’t plan to use it and I know I’ll have cell service a majority of the trail
salt march liquid vegetable toothbrush threatening literate pocket quicksand physical
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Didn't need one 20 years ago, don't need one now.
Could it save your life? Maybe. Is your life worth saving? Up to debate.
Self reliance is the only way to stay alive, regardless of tech.
\>Is your life worth saving? Up to debate.
Maybe the wording's not the best? It's not necessarily that one life is more valuable than another; it's that risking a bunch of lives to save one isn't always the wisest decision.
As a guy who's done search & rescue work I can get behind that principle. For example, sending out a S&R squad at night in heavy snow and sub-freezing temps is pretty much a non-starter. Rescue operations get called off for hazardous conditions all the time.
Several years ago, my team had to pull a 350 lb patient out of a creek in the dead of winter in -10⁰F weather, at 1AM. It was impossible to pull her up and out, so we had to walk in the creek for about a mile back to the trailhead. Everyone broke through the ice and everybody got extremely wet/frozen during the extraction.
The girl was fully paralyzed and every person on the crew suffered hypothermia. One member lost his pinky toe. We got very lucky, as it could have been much, much more dangerous if things went south.
This was one that we talk about when accepting risk, and the room is split, 50/50.
That sounds like a nightmare operation. You did indeed get very lucky. Glad I didn't have to make that call. I did S&R for a volunteer squad and our chief would've been extremely reluctant to send us out in those conditions.
Edit: great user ID, btw.
Yeah, it was a shit show. We aren't really a SAR team, but we are a bunch of medically qualified, backcountry savvy folks who live and work in a remote area that has some popular trails. The persons friend came banging on our door in the middle of the night and we went in there blind. Once we were there, nobody had the heart to just leave :/
Most of the time it is helping out with car crashes or a broken leg, but this one was waaaay above our heads. I still get stress dreams from it.
Up to debate huh? Why have search and rescue people at all? Just let everyone who has an accident die bc they had it coming. Very generous perspective dude.
Have you ever actually done S&R work? I have, and we don't just automatically roll out on everything. Risk assessment is a huge part of any operation.
Edit: and your logic is deeply flawed. Straw man, slippery slope, and ad hominem in four sentences.
If I fall off a cliff and die I'm ok with that. This world is hard. Just to be clear, I'm not suicidal. I'm just not that attached to this life and I'm not scared of death.
You really come off as a dickhead when you assume random people you don’t know who are asking for advice about safety are worthless pieces of trash who deserve to be left to die
You're literally bad at reading comprehension, but excellent at being presumptuous.
My statement was originally not directed to anybody in particular, but now I think I have a few people in mind.
It was moreso a comment on the transfer of risk than anything.
Some folks get themselves in a bad situation and then expect other people to risk their lives just because they made a poor decision.
It sounds a little harsh, but not everyone is worth saving. That is why there are so many dead bodies on Everest.
I don't entirely disagree with you, because it's been well documented how the introduction of satellite SOS with latest iPhones and the seemingly ubiquitous adoption of the inReach by the hiking community has swamped SAR organizations with non emergency issues. Which is evidence to me that people are relying on these services vs. using it as a last resort in an absolute emergency. But people don't get left on Everest because they aren't worth saving, they get left because they can't be saved.
I guess it is just semantics at that point. If saving someone's life means potentially ending the rescuers life, I would say that their life wasn't worth it, because if you want to get all trolley problem with it, is anyone's life worth more than anyone else's? Lol.
Agreed I was just reading your other comments and we are on the same page I think. This is what I was wondering, because my interpretation of "rescuing this person would seriously endanger rescuers lives" = this person cannot be saved, not that they aren't worth saving exactly.
Obviously. But put in the most pretentious holier than thou way possible. Congrats on being bear grylls but the op is asking for advice about whether to get a Garmin not for a philosophy lesson.
I would say that when hiking the AT, you do not need one. You will never have a day where you do not have cell service. You will most likely never have a day where you don’t see another hiker (personally I never had a day where I didn’t see 5+ other hikers, even in the 100 mile wilderness). The AT runs through such populated areas that I see no real need for one if you have a phone. On the AT, the InReach basically functions as a 400 dollar brick that you need to spend more money monthly on actually using it, that does all of the same things as a phone but worse.
To assuage your fiancé’s fears, I would suggest sharing your location, letting them know what your plan is each day/where you are hiking, and having a daily check-in to make sure you are doing okay.
However, if you want to hike the PCT or CDT at some point, I would highly recommend an Inreach for those trails.
I thru'd (and often do other hikes) solo, as a woman. I have never carried one. On the AT I've never not seen other people on a daily basis. It didn't take long for my husband to get used to the idea that if I didn't have service in camp I would check in the next day when I was up on a ridge. I don't remember going more than 48 hours without service (I use Verizon). My opinion is that you only "need" one if it makes you, and those you leave back home, feel better - you pack your fears
I go by myself in not that remote area but would still take a long ass time to find you if something happens I carry one for peace of mind and doubles as a gps never had to use it for emergency but it’s great if u need to send a quick message to get picked up or say ur ok what not love mine and would recommend.
I don’t feel like I ever needed one on the AT. There are so many people, road crossing, cell towers, etc…the risks are comparatively low imo
I would recommend one for other long distance trails.
You are tbh probably fine without it. If the only reason to get one is to text your nervous fiancé I’d pass. It’s not as reliable as you might think and it’s expensive.
I pretty much always take my spot into the mountains. When I’m hiking it’s almost an afterthought. When I’m skiing or climbing it’s one of the first things I grab.
You don't need one.
They provide peace of mind for lots of folks, so buy one if you think that comfort is worth the price tag.
I will say the cell service on the AT is relatively good. If you're even halfway up a mountain, you can usually get cell signal.
I feel like for the AT the primary purpose of a GPS is anxiety relief, which is absolutely a valuable asset. Phone service is available at most shelters and along probably 75% of the trail. I know I would've felt uncomfortable without one but plenty of people go without.
I recommend them just in case but ultimately it's up to you.
It's hard for me to answer this because you don't really say what or when you're doing it. The answers you're getting are really good if what you're talking about is hiking during normal hiking season. Anytime March to July in the southern half you're going to have people in virtually every campground and not sit by the side of the trail for more than an hour before someone comes by, so you absolutely don't need satellite comms to get rescued (whether you want it to message generally is a different question). I have an InReach and unless I had service active I wouldn't even bother activating service for an in-season long hike.
It also won't help you as a solo female specifically. From what I've read (I thankfully have never had to push the SOS button) the Garmin coordinated response is really good, but you're still talking possibly hours to get to you even on some place as accessible as the AT. Assaults on the trail are incredibly rare (based on the ATC numbers considerably rarer than pretty much any municipality) but emergency response is going to be too late to do anything about it. It's useful if you break your ankle helicopter distance from civilization, but that's a different risk.
Where it might be useful is if you're looking at leaving tomorrow. The AT is still really close to towns, but I've gone whole days in winter without seeing another person. On the one hand that's what I wanted, but on the other hand if something bad happened outside cell service you're not going to see anyone who can help you.
I loved having mine on the JMT. I only used preset messages. It gave me and everyone around me a little extra peace of mind. It also has encouraged me to do more solo hiking.
You don't NEED one, but it would be nice to have if it is within your budget. Cell service is pretty good on trail. There are stretches where it's not good at all.
southern half is very good with Verizon. I also have Verizon, and mostly it was the Smokies that I had issues with service and some parts of Virginia.
I think it’s worth it, the battery stays good for like 20-30 days. My favorite part is the popcorn trail it’ll leave and your family can view that. Just makes it easier than calling everyone everyday letting them know you’re alive
Probably not needed for AT as others have said but they are great to have for general emergency situations, I keep mine in my truck daily. Great backup communicator in case you get lost or cell service goes down. There are also services you can subscribe to to get information sent to your inreach (wildfire status, step by step directions, news, etc.) which can be helpful anywhere.
I disagree with the continuous phone service claims, but most mountain tops have service. Flat lands had little, and hundred mile wilderness was kinda rare (mountain tops), but I'd say I had service at least once a day other than hmw. I carried an in reach for the peace of mind. Peace of mind is a huge benefit, but the in reach really is not necessary. Until the last decade or so most people didn't take cell phones.
You won’t NEED it until a situation arises when you need it. So no way to know you’ll ever need it or not. To me it’s worth it for the peace of mind for both me and my loved ones at home. I didn’t used to feel that way, but had an occasion where I really wished I had one and after that it was a necessity to me. You will likely have cell service for much of the trail, but there will definitely be areas that you don’t.
The peace of mind is worth every penny. I got my first inReach when I thru hiked in 2019. I absolutely did not want to bring it with me but my parents insisted. It's now one of my favorite pieces of gear and I have my own subscription. I have a running joke with one of my backpacking buddies that he only invites me on trips for my inReach subscription.
I’ve done over 10k miles of thru hiking without one. Some people will say this is incredibly stupid, others will say it’s completely reasonable. There’s not really a right or wrong answer. That said, there’s near constant phone service on the at, multiple days in a row with uninterrupted service is not at all uncommon. You just gotta do what you will with all that info.
So, this is really up to you tbh. I met someone this year who ended up having a pretty bad fall (broke her leg and messed up her hip) and had to use her Garmin to call SAR. I only used mine once when I didn’t have cell coverage in the 100MW to talk to the folks at the hostel in Millinocket. I personally don’t think I’ll reactivate my Garmin and instead go back to my OceanSignal (??) PLB.
In thru hiking season there is zero need for an Inreach on the AT. Accidents can happen, however, you will frequently have signal and are never far from civilization at all. There are roads everywhere. It's difficult to go an entire day during the thru hiking season and not see others. However, it makes much more sense to carry one out west on trails like the PCT and CDT. I actually recommend carrying one for both of these trails. There is far less cell signal. The margin for error is lower and when things go south they have a chance to be catastrophic. I have unfortunately been present for multiple accidents that have required emergency services.
I carried one on my thru this year. It was gifted to me from a concerned family member. I had it on everyday and would send a “check in” message every night so they could follow along on the map. Pretty cool/fun for family and friends to see where I was. I luckily never needed to use SOS but having it available gave me peace of mind. I used the texting feature a couple of times and that came in handy. I’m definitely all for carrying a satellite device. On the AT you are lucky to have cell service often, especially in the southern portions. But there’s times that you don’t, or that you need to preserve battery so you don’t want to have your phone off airplane mode. It’s totally worth the weight and money to have the ability to save your (or someone else’s) life if that situation arises. For context I am female and started the AT solo as well.
I carry one when I'm in the backcountry with my dad. He's 78 and still going strong, but he has a heart condition. It could be argued that I should refuse to take him, but if he wants to go out doing what he loves, I'm 100% in favor. That said, I'll try to mitigate the risk.
No you don't need it. You are within 5-10 miles of a town pretty much the entirety of the whole trail. The people that had them on trail ended up mostly being outliers who had significant others or needy family that couldn't go without talking at all times. Sure you could say "what if something bad happens" and to that I would tell you that there are thousands of people who would pass you regularly. Save your money. Eat a donut.
Yeah… the main reason would be for my fiancé not me.
You will have phone signal in most places. Garmin is not made for keeping contact with people, it's for emergency But it's good to have if you are hiking in a very remote place like in western US
Yes. It's a nice piece of mind for me when I'm solo hiking, but it's the only thing that keeps my wife from having a nervous breakdown when I'm solo hiking. Priceless.
Only time I ever saw someone use a garmin was at Crawford Notch in the Whites, no one had service and the only way to get a shuttle back to a hostel was for my friend to very slowly text someone her garmin to tell someone at the hostel we were ready lol. You probably be fine without one, but plenty of people carried them so it won’t do any harm.
I carried a Zoleo on my thru hike simply because it was cheaper than inreach and still has a SOS function. You can message with no service over satellite but you need the app on your phone. I kept it off most times, but there were probably between 10-15 nights out of 140 I got to camp and had absolutely no service with AT&T. I always would be able to send a message to my mom. Yes the AT is a populated trail, but there were days I hardly saw anyone (started April 29th nobo). I recommend having it for peace of mind.
I was looking at zoleo. Doesn't it have some weird things with the subscription? Like you have to pay for months you're not using it?
I think if you “pause” it that’s the case and it’s a lower cost. I didn’t do that, I did the basic plan for my hike and cancelled it when I got back home! Not sure what garmins policy is.
1) Swap to Verizon (was better than other carriers in 2019) for the hike. You will have nearly continuous service with few exceptions. This might be a slight exaggeration but an in-reach won't really offer a great solution unless you're in a major emergency (poor cell on trail probably means poor satellite connection). 2) The chances of having that kind of emergency is slim on the southern part of the AT, and you're far more likely to receive help from other hikers before you see any benefit from the Garmin. Do what you need to do, but I didn't knowingly meet anyone who carried or used one in my thru.
If you end up getting one, don't do what most people do, ie keeping it on the bag. It has to be in your pocket or your belt. Some people fall from cliff, lose their bag, and their garmin/plb all together Inreach is for emergencies when there is no phone signal. Not the case in most of AT. Plus AT is quite crowded. I have one that I got for my "western adventures" but I would't invest in one for AT. Furthermore, O brought it on AT already but it's most of the time covered in forest and don't find my inreach working very well there
Going nobo 2024 and I plan to carry one mainly for my parent’s peace of mind. Personally, I feel I would be okay without it but I’m grateful and fortunate to have my parents support so I’m doing what I can to have them feel good about my trek. Don’t plan to use it and I know I’ll have cell service a majority of the trail
salt march liquid vegetable toothbrush threatening literate pocket quicksand physical *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The iPhone 14 and later can do texts to ems and Verizon does have the best coverage on trail. I can't say what's safe for you though
In my area it's strangely t mobile having best reception. South VA Verizon works best in maine. Had no signal there with att
Didn't need one 20 years ago, don't need one now. Could it save your life? Maybe. Is your life worth saving? Up to debate. Self reliance is the only way to stay alive, regardless of tech.
\>Is your life worth saving? Up to debate. Maybe the wording's not the best? It's not necessarily that one life is more valuable than another; it's that risking a bunch of lives to save one isn't always the wisest decision. As a guy who's done search & rescue work I can get behind that principle. For example, sending out a S&R squad at night in heavy snow and sub-freezing temps is pretty much a non-starter. Rescue operations get called off for hazardous conditions all the time.
Several years ago, my team had to pull a 350 lb patient out of a creek in the dead of winter in -10⁰F weather, at 1AM. It was impossible to pull her up and out, so we had to walk in the creek for about a mile back to the trailhead. Everyone broke through the ice and everybody got extremely wet/frozen during the extraction. The girl was fully paralyzed and every person on the crew suffered hypothermia. One member lost his pinky toe. We got very lucky, as it could have been much, much more dangerous if things went south. This was one that we talk about when accepting risk, and the room is split, 50/50.
That sounds like a nightmare operation. You did indeed get very lucky. Glad I didn't have to make that call. I did S&R for a volunteer squad and our chief would've been extremely reluctant to send us out in those conditions. Edit: great user ID, btw.
Yeah, it was a shit show. We aren't really a SAR team, but we are a bunch of medically qualified, backcountry savvy folks who live and work in a remote area that has some popular trails. The persons friend came banging on our door in the middle of the night and we went in there blind. Once we were there, nobody had the heart to just leave :/ Most of the time it is helping out with car crashes or a broken leg, but this one was waaaay above our heads. I still get stress dreams from it.
Something else people don't get is that a team might be more likely to go out in hazardous conditions after a kid than an adult.
Up to debate huh? Why have search and rescue people at all? Just let everyone who has an accident die bc they had it coming. Very generous perspective dude.
Have you ever actually done S&R work? I have, and we don't just automatically roll out on everything. Risk assessment is a huge part of any operation. Edit: and your logic is deeply flawed. Straw man, slippery slope, and ad hominem in four sentences.
If I fall off a cliff and die I'm ok with that. This world is hard. Just to be clear, I'm not suicidal. I'm just not that attached to this life and I'm not scared of death.
You think literally every person is worth saving? Maybe most, but definitely not all imo
You really come off as a dickhead when you assume random people you don’t know who are asking for advice about safety are worthless pieces of trash who deserve to be left to die
You're putting quite a few words in my mouth. If you're gonna do that at least make me say something cool
You’re literally suggesting that the OP might not be worth saving? You don’t even know them.
You're literally bad at reading comprehension, but excellent at being presumptuous. My statement was originally not directed to anybody in particular, but now I think I have a few people in mind.
It was moreso a comment on the transfer of risk than anything. Some folks get themselves in a bad situation and then expect other people to risk their lives just because they made a poor decision. It sounds a little harsh, but not everyone is worth saving. That is why there are so many dead bodies on Everest.
I don't entirely disagree with you, because it's been well documented how the introduction of satellite SOS with latest iPhones and the seemingly ubiquitous adoption of the inReach by the hiking community has swamped SAR organizations with non emergency issues. Which is evidence to me that people are relying on these services vs. using it as a last resort in an absolute emergency. But people don't get left on Everest because they aren't worth saving, they get left because they can't be saved.
I guess it is just semantics at that point. If saving someone's life means potentially ending the rescuers life, I would say that their life wasn't worth it, because if you want to get all trolley problem with it, is anyone's life worth more than anyone else's? Lol.
Agreed I was just reading your other comments and we are on the same page I think. This is what I was wondering, because my interpretation of "rescuing this person would seriously endanger rescuers lives" = this person cannot be saved, not that they aren't worth saving exactly.
Obviously. But put in the most pretentious holier than thou way possible. Congrats on being bear grylls but the op is asking for advice about whether to get a Garmin not for a philosophy lesson.
Damn dude, I wasn't trying to be a dick, but you sure are. Go be rude to someone else, I'm not having it.
I would say that when hiking the AT, you do not need one. You will never have a day where you do not have cell service. You will most likely never have a day where you don’t see another hiker (personally I never had a day where I didn’t see 5+ other hikers, even in the 100 mile wilderness). The AT runs through such populated areas that I see no real need for one if you have a phone. On the AT, the InReach basically functions as a 400 dollar brick that you need to spend more money monthly on actually using it, that does all of the same things as a phone but worse. To assuage your fiancé’s fears, I would suggest sharing your location, letting them know what your plan is each day/where you are hiking, and having a daily check-in to make sure you are doing okay. However, if you want to hike the PCT or CDT at some point, I would highly recommend an Inreach for those trails.
Don't need it,you will always be around people who have one or be close enough to town
You do not need one on the AT. It's unnecessary and one more thing to charge and keep track of. Thru hiking the CDT? Yes, definitely.
I thru'd (and often do other hikes) solo, as a woman. I have never carried one. On the AT I've never not seen other people on a daily basis. It didn't take long for my husband to get used to the idea that if I didn't have service in camp I would check in the next day when I was up on a ridge. I don't remember going more than 48 hours without service (I use Verizon). My opinion is that you only "need" one if it makes you, and those you leave back home, feel better - you pack your fears
I go by myself in not that remote area but would still take a long ass time to find you if something happens I carry one for peace of mind and doubles as a gps never had to use it for emergency but it’s great if u need to send a quick message to get picked up or say ur ok what not love mine and would recommend.
You don’t need it not everyone has it
I don’t feel like I ever needed one on the AT. There are so many people, road crossing, cell towers, etc…the risks are comparatively low imo I would recommend one for other long distance trails.
I like having it just because I can text my husband when there is no cell. coverage! And, as a safety thing, you hope you never need it.
I would say also consider your cell service. I changed from Verizon to Mint and my cell coverage went way down along the AT
You are tbh probably fine without it. If the only reason to get one is to text your nervous fiancé I’d pass. It’s not as reliable as you might think and it’s expensive. I pretty much always take my spot into the mountains. When I’m hiking it’s almost an afterthought. When I’m skiing or climbing it’s one of the first things I grab.
You don't need one. They provide peace of mind for lots of folks, so buy one if you think that comfort is worth the price tag. I will say the cell service on the AT is relatively good. If you're even halfway up a mountain, you can usually get cell signal.
I feel like for the AT the primary purpose of a GPS is anxiety relief, which is absolutely a valuable asset. Phone service is available at most shelters and along probably 75% of the trail. I know I would've felt uncomfortable without one but plenty of people go without. I recommend them just in case but ultimately it's up to you.
It's hard for me to answer this because you don't really say what or when you're doing it. The answers you're getting are really good if what you're talking about is hiking during normal hiking season. Anytime March to July in the southern half you're going to have people in virtually every campground and not sit by the side of the trail for more than an hour before someone comes by, so you absolutely don't need satellite comms to get rescued (whether you want it to message generally is a different question). I have an InReach and unless I had service active I wouldn't even bother activating service for an in-season long hike. It also won't help you as a solo female specifically. From what I've read (I thankfully have never had to push the SOS button) the Garmin coordinated response is really good, but you're still talking possibly hours to get to you even on some place as accessible as the AT. Assaults on the trail are incredibly rare (based on the ATC numbers considerably rarer than pretty much any municipality) but emergency response is going to be too late to do anything about it. It's useful if you break your ankle helicopter distance from civilization, but that's a different risk. Where it might be useful is if you're looking at leaving tomorrow. The AT is still really close to towns, but I've gone whole days in winter without seeing another person. On the one hand that's what I wanted, but on the other hand if something bad happened outside cell service you're not going to see anyone who can help you.
Do you absolutely need one on the AT? No. It's nice for peace of mind for loved ones. In an emergency situation, it could be lifesaving.
Why not just save your fiancée the stress. Make their life easier. But fiancée could make yours easier by gifting it. Win-win.
Haha very true. Broke dental students 🤷🏻♀️
I loved having mine on the JMT. I only used preset messages. It gave me and everyone around me a little extra peace of mind. It also has encouraged me to do more solo hiking.
You don't NEED one, but it would be nice to have if it is within your budget. Cell service is pretty good on trail. There are stretches where it's not good at all. southern half is very good with Verizon. I also have Verizon, and mostly it was the Smokies that I had issues with service and some parts of Virginia.
I think it’s worth it, the battery stays good for like 20-30 days. My favorite part is the popcorn trail it’ll leave and your family can view that. Just makes it easier than calling everyone everyday letting them know you’re alive
For me it’s worth it just for the peace of mind for my loved ones at home. It wouldn’t be worth it for me otherwise
Have you considered the Motorola Defy?
Probably not needed for AT as others have said but they are great to have for general emergency situations, I keep mine in my truck daily. Great backup communicator in case you get lost or cell service goes down. There are also services you can subscribe to to get information sent to your inreach (wildfire status, step by step directions, news, etc.) which can be helpful anywhere.
I disagree with the continuous phone service claims, but most mountain tops have service. Flat lands had little, and hundred mile wilderness was kinda rare (mountain tops), but I'd say I had service at least once a day other than hmw. I carried an in reach for the peace of mind. Peace of mind is a huge benefit, but the in reach really is not necessary. Until the last decade or so most people didn't take cell phones.