5 comments

  • deviation 2 hours ago
    I always love reading about Nepal. I've been a handful of times, for various short climbs and for some far longer 30+ day expeditions.

    If you're reading this and need a short escape from life, I really recommend looking into doing the trek to EBC. It's extremely accessible (and cheap), and I've personally seen people as young as 8 y/o and as old as 80 y/o doing it and having the time of their lives.

    I've been all over the world. Antarctica, climbing in Pakistan, trekking through the Middle East... Nepal was one of my first adventures and remains one of my favourites.

    To stay on topic... Teahouses can be found along every route through the mountains. Most of my fond memories are in teahouses, where you get to sit, have a black tea, and reflect on just how beautiful the people (and the mountains) are. It's also a great opportunity to meet people from other cultures. I'll always remember the Russian's who bought me a beer after climbing Island Peak, the cards I played with some kids in Samagaun... I could go on.

    Go visit Nepal!

    • MikeNotThePope 1 hour ago
      I did EBC in late 2024, and I've done a few other treks, too. I will say that while EBC was great & I'm glad I went, it's far more commercialized & full of tourists than some other treks. I found the experience of other treks (Langtang Valley, Mardi Himal) to have a more intimate and cozy vibe.
    • hermitcrab 51 minutes ago
      Nepal is great. The people are generally very friendly. Kathmandu is very cosmopolitan. The mountains are stunning. I am going back again for the first time in 25 years. I'm doing a much gentler trek this time!
  • hermitcrab 1 hour ago
    I trekked to the summit of Mera Peak some 25 years ago. We slept in tents every night. There were very few, if any, teahouses between Lukla and the summit back then. I guess it is good that more Nepalis are making a living from trekkers with their tea houses.

    It was an incredible experience, but not for the faint-hearted. A couple of people in our group were unlucky and had serious issues (oedema and an aneurism) and were too high for helicopter evacuation, but they both survived. If you want to do something like this, go with a reputable company (such as KE Experience in the UK).

    • joakleaf 1 hour ago
      Mera Peak is said to be possible without any climbing experience, and it looks like the trek from Lukla is about 2 weeks. Is that true? How hard is the trek -- Looks like it requires well above average fitness level?
      • hermitcrab 54 minutes ago
        (Based on my recollections from ~25 years ago) Mera peak is the second highest non-technical peak in the world (the highest is in S America) at ~21,000 feet. Meaning you can basically walk to the top (no real climbing, but we were roped together for the final section, in case of crevasses). But the altitude and weather makes it much tougher than the equivalent trek near sea level. The summit day was incredibly gruelling, the hardest thing I have ever done physically. So you need a decent level of fitness.

        If you are significantly overweight or have dodgy knees, then it isn't for you. You are moderately fit and prepared to do some long walks in preparation, then you are probably fine. If you aren't sure, maybe go on one of the lower level treks and see how you get on.

        • helsinkiandrew 28 minutes ago
          > the highest is in S America

          Aconcagua in Argentina. It's on my 'things to do if in the area' list. The nearest airport is only a 200km drive on a tarmac road away and then a 40km trek to the peak! Although the 4km altitude gain is likely to be harder than the distance.

          • hermitcrab 15 minutes ago
            Mera Peak is in an amazing location, you can see a number of the world's highest peaks from the top (if it's clear), including Everest. IIRC Aconcagua doesn't have quite as much going for it, apart from being slightly higher. Each to their own.
  • fooker 54 minutes ago
    This is main difference between backpacking in the US vs backpacking in India/Nepal/Bhutan.

    You just pack clothes, no matter how remote your destination is, there’s going to be food and shelter available every 6-8hours.

    • hermitcrab 49 minutes ago
      >there’s going to be food and shelter available every 6-8hours

      In Nepal? That sounds like a risky assumption to make.

      • fooker 42 minutes ago
        Yes

        Of course if you go completely off-trail for days all bets are off.

    • wavefunction 44 minutes ago
      "Backpacking" in the US is conceptually and vernaculary different from trekking, not to argue something you probably know already and aren't claiming. The guesthouses in these countries were also government sponsored or owned-outright in my experience. There's an economic benefit to providing employment for the caretakers and of course for foreign tourism and even local travelers.

      Maybe highway rest-stops are the closest analog for the US but even many of those have been shuttered by governments driven to parsimony.

      • fooker 39 minutes ago
        Not just guesthouses though, it’s pretty easy to find a place to sleep in small villages.

        The word for it is ‘home-stay’, there are a few houses in every village that are set up to accommodate guests for a very reasonable amount of money.

        And these villages are pretty much everywhere.

        I have been lost in the Himalayas, and it was not that much work to walk down the river to a village.

  • maximgeorge 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • Lucasjohntee 1 hour ago
    [flagged]