Solo

[RoySwkr]

And along the same lines as Dugan's, if you were hik'n with a small child you would not be solo, but the child might not be able to go for help

I would say that to be "solo" you would have to be alone, no pets or kids.

Note that if your companion is a pet or a kid that you may have to carry supplies for or worry about the safety of, hiking solo may be easier than hiking with such companions.

Similarly, flying solo in an airplane may be far easier than flying in close formation.

Note that for some reason, whitewater boaters now call it "solo" (we used to call it "single") if you are alone in a boat even if accompanied by other boats, this is a different use of the word.

 

[pegbert]

I appreciate the various and diverse insights given in reply to my question. Even though everyone is subject to their own internally inspired viewpoint, I have, partially through the opinions stated in the replies, determined my position to the initial question. While I was leaning this way previously, I am now firmly of the opinion that (for me at least) having one's dog along does not count as "solo".

The primary reason that I have come to this conclusion, after reflecting on my recent hikes, is that the dog offers companionship and support (or hindrance) along the trail. It is this nearly constant interaction that negates the totally solo perspective.

PS. My whitewater community still considers it solo only if you paddle without partners.

 

[Dugan]

One can split hairs forever on such issues.

With Dugan 3.75-legs, that would take literally forever!

 

[Rivet]

When I sign in to a trail register, for "number in party" I always put one (1) ... even if I have my dog with me. Maybe I should put one and a half (1 1/2).

 

[smitty77]

I just call it "solo hikes with my dog" to avoid any ambiguity.

I don't consider it solo for the very fact that I'm always thinking about the dog's wellbeing, kind of like hiking with kids.

Smitty