People make a lot of fuss when it comes to what cooking system to bring along on the Pacific Crest Trail, but I have a simple solution to everyone's problem: go stoveless (that means “no stove” for anyone who has problems with suffixes).
An unthinkable act of trail heresy for many, the idea of not bringing a stove along may not even be an option considered by many hikers.
I recently took a hike up the Haleakala volcano on Maui (documentation to come), and encountered a ranger who decided to lecture me on LNT and backcountry skills. When the topic of cooking came up I informed the ranger that I was not carrying a stove. “How are you going to cook food, then?” she asked. Disappointed by the question I shook my head and hiked on.
You need food to survive, you do not need a stove.
STOVELESS CONS
I will admit that some people on the Pacific Crest Trail had some objectively amazing dehydrated meals prepared and shipped in their resupply boxes, and sometimes I was lucky enough to be offered some of this delicious hiker food (thanks Hummingbird and Bear Claw).
But the reality is that I often sat quietly munching on a bar or some gorp as I watched my hiking buddies prepare their food for the night (but if it was late, then I was happy to be getting quickly to sleep).
So why is it a bad idea to leave your stove behind?
- You cannot make your morning coffee (I hate coffee)
- Stoves are far easier and more efficient than a campfire (for cooking)
- Building fires is often illegal or dangerous (stoves can be too)
- No hot meals (find another way to combat hypothermia)
- Sometimes your stoveless creations turn out less delicious than expected
- Not having anything to cook can outcast you at dinner time (loser)
Not bringing a stove also means that you do not get to share in the excitement of being afraid of igniting a wildfire every time you want a meal; my alcohol stove was quite terrifying at times.
NO STOVE PROS
So what are you really getting by carrying a stove? Ramen? Dehydrated mashed potatoes? The ability to accidentally set fire to the surrounding wilderness?
The fact is that you do not need a stove whilst backpacking. It is a luxury. Hot food and hot coffee are not a prerequisite to survival (although I know many of you out there believe otherwise).
So what are the benefits of leaving the cooking gear at home?
- The weight savings of a stove, pot, and fuel
- Save the space of the stove, pot, and fuel in your pack
- Time savings (cooking takes time, and is rarely worth the effort)
- No need to worry about carrying extra water for cooking
- It's a conversation starter (many fellow hikers cannot believe that you would dare travel sans stove)
- More incentive to build a relaxing (and rewarding) fire
- Less decision-making when it comes to buying food
- Decreased chances of becoming “that hiker” who starts a wildfire and ruins hiking for everyone
- Makes meals in town that much better
- Washing your pot sucks
As you can now see, going stoveless does indeed have its advantages, and may not be quite as terrifying as you previously thought.
Really want a hot meal? If you are thru-hiking, then chances are you will make plenty of hiker friends who will happily lend you their stoves on occasion (although you may need to pack out a Coke or two to sweeten the deal).
The verdict? Leave the stove at home.
I wonder how many calories you gain by eating hot foods and drinks? Your body will have to heat up anything you consume and that requires calories. So your fuel is really another source of calories. It might turn out to be net zero or even weight savings to carry a stove and fuel, especially if the water source is cold, you’re sharing the stove, and you’re carrying several days worth of food at a time. Have you encountered any research on this, beyond internet musings?
I have not encountered research on this and calorie counting is not something that I’ve ever paid attention to on the trail (or off).
Hi Mac! So what did you mainly eat on the trail?
I list most of my diet at the end of this post: https://www.halfwayanywhere.com/trails/pacific-crest-trail/the-thru-hiker-diet-eating-on-the-pct/
Stoves are optional, but cooked meals are often more nutritious and warm liquid meals are better for your health.
This just means I eat double the hot meals in town 😉
On my 5 month solo bicycle trip from Mexico to Canada on the west coast, I opted not to take a stove. I gained 10 pounds. On the following trip from SF to Crater Lake with a girlfriend, we took a stove. Out only 1 month and I LOST 10 pounds! Thanks for the posting–I’m surprised that there isn’t a flurry of discussion! [It’s a “hot” topic! Hey, you’re not one to miss an opportunity either!]
That’s interesting. Maybe it was due to all the extra calories you were burning with the girlfriend?
On a bike trip I think I would bring a stove along – but when walking the stove and everything that goes with it takes up too much space for me. Note to self: go on bike trip.
Actually, we just ate better on the trip with a stove–and with a partner. By myself, I tended to push too hard and ride too long. Dumb. By the time I arrived at a store I was nearly bonked and I would buy junk food. With the stove we prepared more nutritious meals. One “plus” for a stove.
I like what you wrote: You need food to survive; you do not NEED a stove. It’s great to look at the options and examine what we can get along without. The last trip out–cycling around Puerto Rico with the wife–we didn’t take a stove….BUT there were food venders everywhere. Restaurants, stalls and trailers selling fresh everything!
When you take that bike trip, remember that you’re always near civilization [unless it’s a multi-day mountain bike trip]. I took a road bike trip all around Colorado [10 peaks over 10,000′ in 10 days] and then back to the Bay Area with only a small handlebar bag and my sleeping bag strapped to the underside of my saddle. No panniers. No rack. No problem. I washed out my shorts and shirt every day in gas station restrooms and put them back on. Dry in minutes.
I see people bike touring with front and rear panniers stuffed to the max; a rack piled high– and just shake my head. Like with backpacking, you have to personally power all that weight every meter! Stove? Fuel? Maybe…probably not.
I can’t wait to get started planning this bike trip.
The routes and countries are almost unlimited. In 2009 I wanted to ride across the U.S.; my wife wanted to ride in Africa. We compromised on a 6 week trip in Eastern Europe. It was off the beaten path, but we still had infrastructure. It was fantastic. There are wonderful paths along the Danube. OH, and we took a stove on that trip. Didn’t use it!!
The “smart” phone signed me in with my name on the post above…Edog here. BTW, Puerto Rico was beautiful, and the people and food were phenomenal, BUT the traffic was deadly. Not on my top list of places to cycle, although the cycling community is doing a lot to increase awareness. There is a Vuelta Puerto Rico route that we used–very helpful. If you’re interested in cycling in the Caribbean, check out “The Handsomest Man In Cuba”. Australian woman does solo bike trip around the island!
Oh yeah, and I WISH I were burning calories because of the girlfriend. But like any 19 year old with cranial-rectal inversion, I ended up marrying her. It took 17 years to wise up and leave…but that story belongs with your article on 17 things scarier than bears.