67

When you're in a path and you encounter another group going the other way, it is said that whoever is going down should stand aside to let those going up pass through. Why?

  • 8
    People going up would prob be happy to stop and wait for a minute as a chance to catch their breath. :) – Desorder Dec 20 '16 at 22:16
  • 12
    This is not really part of leave no trace ethics but it is part of trail culture. – Glenn Dec 20 '16 at 23:29
  • 3
    I put that as a joke but I would always give away to a family, bigger or older group and I would expect to be given the right to pass if i had my family with me. :) – Desorder Dec 21 '16 at 2:38
  • 8
    This is not something that I have ever done or heard of! – user2766 Dec 21 '16 at 10:43
  • 9
    I'd never heard of this either. If I were walking uphill and someone was jogging or running downhill towards me, I'd yield. It's far harder for someone with significant downhill momentum to stop (and if it's slippery underfoot, he may fall in the more dangerous downhill direction, possibly colliding with me in the process). More generally if I'm walking and someone coming the other way is jogging, running or trail-cycling, I'll yield to the person with greater momentum and athletic investment therein, regardless of gradient. This just seems polite. – nigel222 Dec 21 '16 at 11:13

10 Answers 10

113

There are three good reasons for this:

  1. The harder work an uphill hiker has to do
  2. The smaller field of vision of an uphill hiker
  3. They are in that "hiking rhythm" zone which shouldn't be interrupted (Inertia)

This paragraph contains everything you need to know:

And most important and most ignored, everything else being equal, give the right of way to the hiker going uphill!

Why the latter? Think about how most people hike - usually focused downward, a few feet ahead on the trail, watching their footing to try to avoid a face plant. If you're headed downhill, you'll generally see some distance ahead of you on the trail at the same time as you're looking down to where you will set your feet the next step or two. You'll see any hiker coming up hill well in advance of meeting. On the other hand, if you're hiking uphill, and looking down at the trail, your range of vision is really just a few feet in front of you. Clearly the hiker going downhill has the visual advantage, and time, to adjust his position so the uphill hiker can pass. And, it's a lot easier for the downhill hiker to stop and resume than it is for the uphill hiker. Think about the interstate trucker or you on a bike - it takes more energy and time to restore speed if starting from a dead stop. So it is with the uphill hiker, especially if carrying a backpack - let her come on through so she can benefit from the "body in motion" principle in physics. This applies to hikers running downhill too. And just because you're running downhill (nobody is impressed anyway, and secretly hoping you face plant) that doesn't give you the right of way.

From Lowergear - Who has the "Right-of-Way"?


Further citation:

On a narrow pass, hikers going uphill have the right of way. Simply put, hikers moving uphill are generally working harder than those on the downhill slope. It is courteous to move to the side and let the uphill trekkers pass through.

From Phoenix New Times - Hiking Etiquette

It seems that many hikers—even experienced ones—may not know or always remember this, but hikers going uphill have the right of way. This is because in general hikers heading up an incline have a smaller field of vision and may also be in that “hiking rhythm” zone and not in the mood to break their pace. Often an uphill hiker may let others come downhill while they take a breather, but remember that’s the uphill hiker’s call.

Form Co-Op Journal - Trail Etiquette

  • 7
    Very nice and complete answer! especially with good references and not speculation, as the others. – Polygnome Dec 21 '16 at 11:09
  • 3
    +1 For covering Vision, Effort and the "right" to defer. – Glenn Dec 21 '16 at 20:05
  • 5
    Good answer. One might emphasis " everything else being equal" a bit. The hiker going uphill might appriciate a small stop, but not to be forced to stop. So the principle is not really "Uphill hiker first" but "Uphill hiker gets to decide." – Guran Dec 22 '16 at 7:31
  • 4
    Last but not least: this is also how right-of-way is handled in road traffic (at least in Switzerland): the driver going downhill will have to give way. – fgysin Dec 22 '16 at 9:49
  • 3
    @OddDeer: Link to the official Swiss law in German (though on the right you can switch to French/Italian also) admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19620246/index.html See Art. 38, Abs. 1. (There are also rules that say that longer/heavier vehicles have right of way in Art. 9, Abs. 2, which can overrule this, so it generally only holds for vehicles of the same category.) – fgysin Dec 22 '16 at 11:57
32

For another possible explanation, I have always found it easier to see oncoming parties when you are going down. When hiking uphill, many people end up almost staring at their feet. In contrast, when hiking downhill you can spot oncoming parties much more easily.

22

It is much easier going down than going up, and it is easier for the people descending to stop than the ones going up.

The people going up will be working much harder, and be more irritated by having to wait for someone.

  • 8
    Also consider biking in the place of hiking -- if you are moving uphill and have to stop, there is considerably energy lost in having to bring momentum up again. Going downhill is easy as taking your hand off the breaks. Likewise, you have a momentum as you hike uphills. Certainly not in the same realm as biking, but nevertheless some. It's just polite to let someone who is working for their momentum and forward progress to continue before those who only have to lean forward to continue downhill. – Mike Manfrin Dec 21 '16 at 0:25
  • 8
    @MikeManfrin There's no such thing as momentum when you're hiking up a steep hill, especially when you're hiking high and steep enough to necessitate rest-steps. – ShemSeger Dec 21 '16 at 6:28
  • 3
    @MikeManfrin I think the main reason for that in biking isn't momentum, but more often ease of getting started again. On a small steep path, getting on your bike uphill can be considerably harder than getting on the bike when going downhill (even more so when riding clipless pedals). – anderas Dec 21 '16 at 7:13
  • 8
    It is not easier to stop going downhill. You have to use muscles to stop going downhill. Uphill you just stop going uphill. – paparazzo Dec 21 '16 at 9:32
  • 6
    If you're descending so quickly that you have a hard time stopping you should probably slow down. It's important to maintain control at all times, even when going down a steep hill. – Andrew Brēza Dec 21 '16 at 14:27
17

In addition to the fact that it is easier to go down than up, I think the biggest issue is safety. If you were to fall while going down, there is risk of injury to those below (coming up). It is much easier to lose your footing and fall while moving downwards, and knocking people off a trail can lead to serious injury. If you were to fall while going up, you would injure only yourself, and typically it is easier to catch yourself.

  • 3
    This. I remember one time encountering a group of people going up a very narrow path on the edge of a cliff. They wanted to wait on the path's outer part in order for me to go down first and when my feet accidentally slipped, a few of them shrieked... If at that time I fell down, I am not sure if we would all still be alive today. – CPHPython Dec 22 '16 at 15:59
13

I suspect it's just inherited from the "rules of the road" extant before most road traffic was motorised and before most roads were widened to 2 lanes.

On single-track roads e.g. in Scotland, it's still the rule of the road, and any motorist who remembers it is much appreciated by the cyclists working hard uphill.

The underlying reason is that going uphill - and especially starting uphill - is much harder (especially if you have to pick up toestraps!) and though this applies to some extent to hikers too, I suspect it would simply be too confusing to have one rule for the road and a different rule on footpaths.

See point 155 in the current edition of the Highway Code regarding single track roads :

"Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can. "

  • "... before most road traffic was motorised" - do you mean horses/donkeys? – anatolyg Dec 21 '16 at 17:03
  • 2
    Horses, donkeys, carts, carriages, as well as people walking. And, when it came along, a bicycle was deemed "a carriage, within the meaning of the Act" in an amendment to earlier (UK) traffic law. – Brian Drummond Dec 21 '16 at 17:11
6

I think hiking involves an element of psychological momentum.

You time your rests to be either very short or very long to control momentum loss. You rest with your pack on to avoid momentum loss.

In this case, I think it's about the mental momentum because of physical momentum. It is way easier to overcome inertia to continue down the hill when gravity gives you a boost than it is to overcome inertia restarting an uphill hike against gravity.

That is to say, I think it is less about the ease of going than it is about the difficulty of resuming.

2

Under the "going-down person stops" convention, the up-going hiker will automatically and immediately have some warning that something is wrong if the down-going hiker fails to stop because he is unable to do so, allowing him to stop and/or take evasive action with minimal communication between the parties.

If a nearby cliff, steep trails, slippery conditions, and foreign languages are involved then this convention makes a lot of sense.

1

Going uphill is hard work, and changing up your speed can ruin your momentum. This is why people traveling uphill have the right of way.

  • This does not add much/anything to the existing answers. – imsodin Dec 24 '16 at 0:50
1

There's a simpler answer that ignores any kind of "field-of-view" discussion. In the vast majority of cases involving right-of-way on a shared road, the party going faster yields to the party going slower. So cars yield to bikes which yield to pedestrians.

For example, imagine a flat trail which is shared by bikes and pedestrians. You would expect the bikes to yield to oncoming pedestrians. Since they're going faster, they have a greater responsibility to avoid collisions. In the same way, hikers travelling uphill are assumed to be going slower than downhill hikers. Thus they have the right-of-way.

  • Interesting. But on some trails, the rule of the road is that pedestrians yield to bikers and equestrians: "Hikers should yield to cyclists and horses. Cyclists yield to horses" from ozarktrail.com/guidelines.php. It's simply easier for a pedestrian to hop off the trail than a biker/equestrian. – Don Branson Dec 22 '16 at 16:02
  • Oh! Sounds like you can modify based on... size? Heh. I suppose that I over-condensed "yield to" into "right-of-way". Cars have a responsibility to avoid bikes, but bikes can't just ride in the middle of the street. So maybe I should have stuck to the phrase "yield to". – TheGerm Dec 22 '16 at 22:21
  • 1
    Or modify based on agility? – Don Branson Dec 22 '16 at 22:32
0

I think it's similar to the rule that sailboats are given right of way over motorboats, and sailboats going upwind have right of way over sailboats going with the wind. With the boats, it's that motorboats have more options than sailboats, and sailboats with the wind have more options than those going against it. It's similar with hikers: those going uphill have to work harder, and possibly have fewer options.

protected by Community Dec 26 '16 at 12:43

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.