Is Backpacking Dying Off ?

[Sarcasm the elf]

I'm not very worried about the dangers. At least half of my 80# loadout for the A.T. is ammunition and Bear Grylls survival tools. I got danger covered. My bigger concern is the future of publicly available outdoor areas, the longevity of wildlife, and the overall integrity of wilderness environments in the future.

.

.

.

Disclaimer: Before I get roasted too badly, my base weight is NOT 80#, I've never bought a Bear Grylls anything, and I would never dream of bringing any ammo stronger than Gatorade and Clif bars on the trail.

Speaking of Ammo and available outdoor areas, you should check out the Pittman-Robertson act if you are not yet familiar with it. The act is a federal tax on guns, ammunition, fishing equipment, and fishing and hunting licenses. The funds raised are earmarked exclusively for conservation projects for wildlife species and habitat (funds are used for all conservation causes, not just those that affect game species). This tax is the single largest source of conservation funds in the country.
There is concern that long term declines in the number of hunters in this country will significantly reduce this conservation funding. While I don't want to get into a political discussion, I really wish that there was a similar tax program on general outdoor equipment (backpacking, biking, skiing, mountaineering, etc) The Pittman-Robertson was actually created at the insistance of hunters and sportsman who recognized the danger of wreckless habitat/resource loss and wanted to ensure that their sport was being done responsibly and in a way where it could be passed to futire generations.

*Before someone jumps in to comment, let me say for the record that my explanation of the act grossly oversimplifies it. People who are interested should search the web as there is a wealth of information available on the subject.

[g00gle]

Hunting licenses may be declining, but over the last two years or so (the ammo shortage and the rebound of purchases thereafter) I've witnessed an awful lot of ammo being bought up, which mighty help offset the license deficit just a bit. Definitely have to look more in to this act. Thanks for the heads up.

[iAmKrzys]

NPS show overall numbers are done esp when the population increase is factored in (less percentage of people overall). In raw numbers, from 1979 to 2013, the NPS reports two-millions people LESS doing overnight activities. That is including backpacking, camping and backcountry lodges, etc. . From 1979 to 2013, there was a 700k+ person decline in backpacking per NPS figures.

I couldn't agree more. Last year we were staying at Bass River State Forest campground that had very few visitors. I found a geocache near where we camped that had this log entry which really sums it up well:

Very eerie here: middle of the summer with a nice huge campground, and only two camp sites in use. Back when I was a kid, you'd have trouble getting into a campground like this because it would be too full. Where is everyone?

I think the trend is that more people nowadays do what I call "trophy hiking" - they go for well-known trails that they can boast about on Facebook while lesser known trails get fewer visitors.

[Sarcasm the elf]

Hunting licenses may be declining, but over the last two years or so (the ammo shortage and the rebound of purchases thereafter) I've witnessed an awful lot of ammo being bought up, which mighty help offset the license deficit just a bit. Definitely have to look more in to this act. Thanks for the heads up.

Since you ask:
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...reak-all-recor

The increase in demand for guns and ammo over the last few years has produced record breaking conservation recenue throgh the Pittman-Robertson act. The problem with the recent ammo hording trend is that most people aren't using the ammo, they're just stockpiling it. Since ammo can be stored for decades and still work perfectly, there will probably be a huge slump in demand for it in the coming years once people stop stockpiling, realize that they own enough and slowly use what they have. I'm worried that this will cause a lot of problems for conservation funding.

[jmitchell]

Mags,

I only questioned relying on NPS data in my first post. The conclusion that popularity has declined, particularly in relation to population growth, may be correct. My personal experience is just that, but it is not an uninformed hunch. I hike and backpack regularly. I have seen more people on several trails; others remain little used.

The NPS data may have some gaps or is not otherwise clear-

There is not a category for national scenic trails, and if the NSTs are included in "other" parks, that category has about doubled in visitation.

There is a category for misc overnights, which includes "groups"; does that include backpacking groups? That category has grown.

Also keep in mind the state parks in the country far eclipse the national parks. They attract 720 million visitors. I would be curious to see those categories and if there has been any growth.

The two sources you cite do not seem consistent, although they are separated by seven years. One saw an increase in wilderness visits; the other predicts a decrease. One saw a decrease in rock climbing; the other predicts an increase.

******

If backpacking is decreasing in popularity, my hunch is that it is because outdoor recreation interests have diversified, resulting in losses for the traditional pursuits, such as backpacking, hunting, fishing. There are also generational and demographic issues. Non-whites appear to be less inclined to backpack and their populations are increasing. Maybe that will change as outdoor groups reach out to minorities and those individuals have more exposure to the outdoors.


Regardless, our need for the outdoors and nature will never disappear, regardless which activity we pursue. And while overuse brings problems and regulations, at the very least it shows people have an interest, a connection, and may be more likely to promote the protection of the places they visit. As populations and our need for resources grow, the conflict between open space and economic/resource needs will only increase. That annoying kid crying on the crowded trail today may be the one protecting it years from now.

[Dogwood]

Some of us may be taking more of an alarmist view seeing more of a declining backpacking issue than the reality.

For example in this link:

"...from 2014...

http://www.fs.fed.us/research/docs/o...ds_summary.pdf

Notice the "visiting primitive areas" is expected to decline. (USFS puts it as "Visiting Primitive Areas Backpacking; primitive camping; visiting a wilderness ")

Specifically, in that link posted who is included in the 2.1% Projected Percentage Change in Per Capita Participation by Activity Group* 2008-2030?

Nowhere do I note explanations how the data was accumulated, how segment categories are being defined(who's specifically being included in various user segments), etc. Maybe, I missed it in that specific link?

Here's why I ask. Since we're on a hiking based website, mainly backpackers/hikers we have a tendency to assume all who visit primitive areas do so this way. COULD those 2.1 % projections include other who access primitive areas say bicyclists, boaters, paddlers, fly ins, skiers, snowshoers, etc? If so than correlating a 2.1% decline solely to backcountry backpackers is incorrect.

I also want to know before coming to hardline conclusions "backpacking is declining"how does the link reposted here with the included bar graph define the "hiking" category? The bar graph says that user segment is expected to increase 3.1 % PER CAPITATA. COULD backpackers also be viewed as hikers in this bar graph? Are hikers being defined as simply day hikers who do not plan to also camp or who aren't carrying backpacks? I'm not ready to make assumptions! I want to know details as how stats, graphs, etc are being defined noting how they are portrayed can be very misleading to represent different things sometimes opposite conclusion being made on the same stats.

[g00gle]

Since you ask:
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...reak-all-recor

The increase in demand for guns and ammo over the last few years has produced record breaking conservation recenue throgh the Pittman-Robertson act. The problem with the recent ammo hording trend is that most people aren't using the ammo, they're just stockpiling it. Since ammo can be stored for decades and still work perfectly, there will probably be a huge slump in demand for it in the coming years once people stop stockpiling, realize that they own enough and slowly use what they have. I'm worried that this will cause a lot of problems for conservation funding.

Great article! I don't feel so alone in my ignorance now. Actually going to forward that link around to some friends today. And I cannot argue with your logic about the possibility of a coming sales slump. Too bad the gub'ment doesn't pay taxes on their purchases or we'd just have to wait for DHS to purchase another 25-million rounds (or whatever that ridiculous number was) of ammo for "training" purposes. (Stop, Google! Slowly back away from that topic, lol.)

Here's where my ignorance on the act really comes in to play... I love shooting sports and I'm Pro-2nd, but I don't hunt and I barely ever fish. As a matter of fact, I'm one of those outdoorsy types that [* takes deep breath, preparing for the usual public ridicule] that abhors hunting animals for sport. There are times and reasons to hunt and/or kill animals, but I have never believed that fun qualified as one of them. I do have friends that hunt occasionally, but we rarely talk about it, so the topic of taxes, etc., has never really arose from those conversations.

Now, in true contradictory fashion, I do hope to get some bow hunting experience one day, if the proper circumstances ever arose in the same period as the free time. But that is not just for a fun Sunday, but rather (to me) it's about fitting in with nature (and the natural food chain, cycle, etc.) on a very spiritual level. And I'm not talking about bow hunting from a tree or some other crap. People whom mistake that sedentary activity for "hunting" should really get a dictionary and look up the word "fishing" (Public Clue: One of those activities is passive and one is active - and sitting on your ass waiting on something to smell your bait or spray or salt lick, etc. ad nauseaum, is not active!)

Whew! Dialing back rant mode... So, my lack of knowledge about the act is probably because I'm only about 50% involved with spending money on the activities that fund the act. However, learning more about it (and supposing the funds are spent the way that they were intended to be spent) I'm quickly becoming a fan of this act. I wish it did something to further counter-act the selling, leasing, and pillaging of national parks - something our illustrious leaders in D.C. are getting very good at lately. But from what I've read so far from here and from here I don't disagree with much anything in this act except for the last proposed amendment to it (and that's only because I don't think anyone should have to pay to support my hobbies but me.)

[Dogwood]

BTW, it is NOT a debate I seek. It is a deeper satisfactory understanding I seek before making conclusions. I tend to questions things just as Jmitchell is. Just because questions are asked it does not entail a predetermined judgement of wrong or right.

[Dogwood]

I too am now done with my coffee and about to head out....to backcountry trail maintenance and backcountry backpacking.

[Mags]

Well, since are we relying on anecdotal data... I got back from trip. The parking lot was crowded..with day hikers. I came to the back to trailhead early this morning. All the cars but mine were gone. Made my coffee as I was not ready to head home. Three cars pulled up for day hiking. I was the only overnight backpacker at a trail head one hour from Boulder. Day hiking OTOH was very popular.


As for other pursuits..that's kinda what I said. I think we can all agree "done in a day activities" are rising more so than overnight activities.

I am not about to do yet more research in 50 state parks (if someone wants to write a grant for me to do this..go for it! ) ...but here's an outdoor industry report..sponsored by Coleman no less! Since companies decide how to spend their resources based on these reports. I'm going to go with it.
http://www.outdoorfoundation.org/res...ping.2013.html


In brief

Thirty-eight million Americans went camping in2012 for a total of 516.6 million days. Participationis down from 42.5 million campers and 534.9million days in 2011.

Camping lost a net of 4.5 million participantsfrom 2011 to 2012 due to a high churn rate of32 percent.

Young adults lost the largest percentage ofparticipants, down from 17 percent in 2011 to13 percent in 2012.



So overnight use is declining. Now, I realize this is for camping is not backpacking specific, but you get the idea. Heck..most Americans don't even use all their vacation time. Any surprise?

If you care about the wild places, this is cause for concern. I suspect front country amenities such as visitors centers will be fine. Backcountry trails and possibly protection? Not so much.

Don't think so? Check out what happened to the Pawnee National Grassland. Imagine if more people camped there?

[egilbe]

wherein day packs take an increasing share of the pack market while technical overnight packs are a

Source: https://www.hcn.org/issues/46.12/the...of-backpacking

I love being outdoors, hiking, exploring, practicing bushcraft skills (that I'm thankful I rarely need), and just getting away from the great neon distraction. I realize that puts me in a minority population for hobbyist, but I have trouble believing that everyone is so caught up in smartphones and creature comforts that less and less people are getting out for anything more than day trips.

After so many years of humanity trying so hard to avoid the perils of the wild and striving for comfort and security, it's no wonder that vagabonds, tramps, and even basic outdoor enthusiasts have always been at the fringes of society. But could it really be that long-term experiences of the true wonders, challenges, and serenity of the outdoors is actually becoming a fading pastime?

I really hope not, because as interest wanes, so too does care and concern.

You know, if the day packs increase by a large margin and backpacks only increase by a small margin, that is still a net decrease comparatively that would account for the [QUOTEdeclining percentage of total sales.][/QUOTE]

I see more people out, not less.

[double d]

Been getting more into this too, but for a different reason... There are pretty places in illinois but not much "infrastructure" from the standpoint of safe water sources and legal places to camp. It's a bit of a mileage issue really. There are places within state parks to hike, but stringing much more than 15 miles together within a park makes it tough. On the flipside is the 500 mile Grand Illinois Trail, mileage is there in the form of rail to trail style travel but it's meant for bikers, not backpackers.

There are 30+ mile water carries and some creative camping required on most of the trail. In the chicagoland area of the trail- the only safe water sources are typically at a gas station or other business because of pollution. Also, unless you're capable of 30+ mile days, most of the trail is fairly inaccessible for most folks.

Bike packing is proving to be a good solution to the "blank" miles of the trail, as well as making large portions of the trail more enjoyable for a wider audience.

I think if that big prairie trail they are looking at will work out west some type of bikepacking options would put it in reach. Much like my local trails- while the prairie or farmland does have it's charm... walking through a cornfield for 20-30 miles just to link a section and pass through the next state park gets old fast. Hoping on the bike has helped renew my interest in the local trails for sure. For now, I just wear my regular pack.

Great observation Just Bill about our state of Illinois, I just don't think people who live in/near states that have great hiking trails know how great their opportunities are.

[Heliotrope]

Guys, unless you have numbers, your anecdotal hunches aren' really good. I used NPS data because it was the most readily available.

But since I enjoy a good debate, I've taken up the gauntlet. I'm also very good at Googling to find numbers versus "This is what I really think"

Primitive camping (not in developedcampgrounds), backpacking, and mountain climbingshowed decreases in the number of people who participated, butincreases in the number of days of participation

http://www.foresthistory.org/publica...08/Cordell.pdf

So, much like the thru-hiker "proof", less people are doing it..the numbers left are more active.

Granted it is from 7 years ago..but it is Saturday morning and I am drinking my coffee and about to head out.

This is from 2014...however.

http://www.fs.fed.us/research/docs/o...ds_summary.pdf

Notice the "visiting primitive areas" is expected to decline. (USFS puts it as "Visiting Primitive Areas Backpacking; primitive camping; visiting a wilderness ")

Curiously, the trend shows of less people doing it...but the core people doing it doing it more.

Keep in mind these percentages in the first example do not reflect the population growth of the United States. Factor in the population growth, and the numbers decline more.

I could do more..but I am sticking by my research vs hunches.

Informed hunches are sometimes correct.

Uninformed hunches usually aren't.


I think the much better discussion we should all be having is why is it declining? If we are left with a smaller percentage of the population invested in the backcountry....well, draw your own conclusions.

I own a tourist based business on MDI home to Acadia National Park which is a very front country experience with large annual visitation (millions). Of the customers I have asked over the years not one has ever ventured north to Baxter or the AT corridor. Here on MDI people can day hike, Kayak canoe, rock climb etc. there are fine restaurants, fancy inns and lots of shopping. I think people are used to getting it all and don't want to rough it. People love the national parks but many like to drive through it. In Acadia the Most crowded areas are thunder hole and Cadillac Mt summit. You can drive to both and buy souvenirs,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk