THE SOLO TRAVELLER
Your world. Your way.
Risk, Readiness and Respect – A Confidence and Safety Series
Photographer: KaLisa Veer | Unsplash.
When hiking alone is not the whole story
By Josh Chandler
Briefly …
Following emergencies involving solo hikers, the conversation often centres on whether the person should have been alone at all. Here, we explore why safety in wilderness environments is rarely determined by one factor alone, but by preparation, awareness, conditions, judgement, and decision making on the trail.
When a solo hiker goes missing or dies in a wilderness environment, the conversation that follows often settles around a familiar question: should they have been there alone at all? It is a response that extends beyond public commentary, reflecting genuine concern from emergency services, guides, and experienced hikers who understand how unforgiving remote environments can become when conditions change.
The simplicity of that reaction can feel comforting. Wilderness environments are unpredictable, physically demanding, and sometimes unforgiving. The presence of another person can absolutely matter in an emergency, whether through assistance, communication, navigation, or the simple ability to go for help. In some situations, hiking alone may indeed increase risk significantly.
But safety in wilderness environments is rarely determined by one factor alone. Recent incidents involving hikers, trekkers, and tour groups have again demonstrated that emergencies can emerge through a combination of terrain, weather, timing, fatigue, preparation, communication, navigation, equipment, decision making, and rapidly changing conditions. The presence of other people does not automatically remove risk, just as walking alone does not automatically amount to recklessness.
“The presence of other people does not automatically remove risk, just as walking alone does not automatically amount to recklessness.”
Yet the public conversation following hiking incidents often struggles to acknowledge this complexity. Instead, the act of being alone can become treated as the defining error of judgement, particularly when the hiker is a woman, older traveller, or somebody perceived to be physically vulnerable. In many cases, the full circumstances surrounding wilderness emergencies are never completely known, yet hindsight can quickly harden into certainty.
This series is not an argument that solo hiking is inherently safe, nor that every traveller should feel confident walking into remote environments alone. Wilderness spaces demand respect. They require preparation, humility, adaptability, and the willingness to make conservative decisions when conditions change. Solo hikers deserve a more useful and sophisticated safety conversation than simply being told not to go.
“Solo hikers deserve a more useful and sophisticated safety conversation than simply being told not to go.”
For many solo travellers, hiking and trekking are not pursuits built around danger or bravado, but around attentiveness. Walking alone through remote environments can create space for concentration, perspective, challenge, stillness and clarity. For some, it is deeply restorative, while for others it is one of the few experiences that allows complete independence of pace, thought and movement. The answer to safety concerns cannot simply be that these experiences should stop existing – just as the reasons and motivations that inspire them cannot be dismissed.
“The answer to safety concerns cannot simply be that these experiences should stop existing – just as the reasons and motivations that inspire them cannot be dismissed.”
The better question is how solo travellers can move through wilderness environments more thoughtfully and responsibly, with preparation systems and decision-making habits that recognise how quickly small issues can escalate into serious situations. A wrong turn. A weather shift. A navigation error. Wet clothing. Fatigue. Overconfidence. Poor timing. Communication failures. The refusal to turn back. These are often the moments where manageable problems begin compounding into emergencies.
Importantly, many experienced solo hikers are not reckless decision makers at all. In some cases, they may behave more conservatively than groups, where responsibility can become diffused or social pressure encourages people to continue despite deteriorating conditions. Solo hiking can demand a heightened level of self-awareness because there is nobody else to absorb the consequences of poor decisions or, as can often be the case, bad luck.
Any level of self-awareness, however, does not remove risk. Nothing in wilderness environments does. But it does shift the conversation toward something more practical and constructive: how solo hikers prepare, how they assess conditions, how they respond to uncertainty, and how they recognise the difference between persistence and poor judgement. Turning back is not failure, altering plans is not weakness, and seeking assistance is not defeat. In wilderness environments, adaptability is often one of the most important safety skills we can possess.
“In wilderness environments, adaptability is often one of the most important safety skills we can possess.”
In this special series, we will explore these questions through expert perspectives, lived experience, practical guidance, and thoughtful discussion around what safer solo hiking can genuinely look like. Because independence on the trail is built not on fearlessness, but on awareness, preparation, humility, and the ability to make good decisions before small problems become catastrophic.
Josh Chandler is a devoted solo hiker and writer based in the USA.