It's getting late in the season and Bob M. and I needed to get out one more time to test an epic trek we're planning for Wilderness Traverse 2011. (I'm assistant race director for next year.) There's a distinction between course scouting, which we did last weekend, and a course test. Scouting is exploration - maybe looking for a portage between two lakes or checking a trail to see if it would be good for biking. In a test, we start at a CP and go to one or more CPs in sequence using the same mode of travel that the competitors will use.
Unlike scouting expeditions, where my Garmin Forerunner and - surprisingly - my iPhone can provide helpful info, we only allow ourselves to use map and compass to navigate - the same tools the competitors will have. We test in daylight because of the things we're looking for but we have to consider any implications related to the time of day when different types of competitors will do the section.
This year I've been learning about the incredible number of variables involved in planning a long adventure race course - safety considerations (e.g. navigation catch features, rescue routes for first aid crews), landowner permissions, establishing CP locations that will be accessible by volunteers, squinting at satellite maps, learning about trail networks and designing the course with their existence in mind, setting up interesting route choices, selecting terrain for each discipline that is challenging but not too unpleasant, planning short course options that are fun and worth doing, finding TA locations that are big enough and thinking about gear transportation between them, solving the tricky puzzle of linking all the different sections together, and finding/booking a host venue of the right size that happens to be appropriately located for the finish of a wilderness race.
Respect to all the race directors out there who do this work so we can indulge our adventure racing habit. This stuff may look simple when we arrive at the race venue and get our maps and instructions but there's a huge amount of time that goes into it and nobody is getting rich from AR.
Today's trek was longer than either of last year's WT trekking sections. We explored a few trails out of curiosity, which increased our distance, but it would still be a 30+ km trek if we had just travelled directly between CPs. I felt that the navigation was more intricate than last year's long trek. Most bodies of water were smaller so they didn't provide the same huge targets and handrails that we had in 2010. It's not the kind of course where the best navigators will just set a compass bearing and bash through the woods for 5 km but there are handrails and landmarks that will allow midpack teams to navigate safely with a little less precision.
Bob and I are accustomed to being the primary navigators on our respective teams so it won't surprise anyone that we often debate who is going to navigate. What *might* surprise people is that the discussions go like this: "No, YOU navigate this section. I navigated the last one!" Outside of a race context and accompanied by another navigator, I'm afraid we get lazy! However, after the initial agreement about who's going to be in charge, we both follow the map with an eagle eye, talk about features we're seeing and offer "helpful" commentary to the current lead navigator. For the most part, we like the same types of route choices although Bob will follow a trail longer than I will. That's probably because he makes me run the trails so I'm always keen to bushwhack since it lets me catch my breath!
We hit the nav well today - a nice improvement compared to our WT2010 tests when there were a couple of legs with too much AR chat and not enough compass.
There were some beautiful open areas where we could make good time.
There were also some alder-filled wetlands - but fortunately nothing as bad as that heinous bikewhack during the first night of Untamed New England. That's the standard against which I now evaluate every wetland bushwhack.
We missed having Hammer there to tell us whether we were splashing through a fen, swamp, marsh or whatever.
There was one large area where it looked like a microburst had caused significant blowdown of huge trees. This was a little disconcerting given that we had inadvertently gone into the woods on a day with 70 kph wind gusts. That, along with the limited hours of daylight, kept our pace up.
The water was cold but - unlike last year's WT course - it was rarely more than knee deep and there were no tempting route choices that involved swimming. I went up to my waist once because I couldn't jump across a creek after Bob succeeded but that's as wet as it got. Since next year's race is in August, conditions probably won't be much wetter and the water will be warm.
Bob has a roaring metabolism and never brings enough food. Good thing we found this moose.
Once a Tree Hugger, always a Tree Hugger...
Great terrain!
And that's the end of course testing until next spring but the most important scouting/testing is done and the host venue should be announced shortly.