Trail Use was Re: [at-l] Psychology 101

[daveh@psknet.com (Dave Hicks)]

One of the problems with user statistics is what you count.  Safety
statistics are always being debated for the same reason.

To simplify the issue, lets just look at two users, in an extremely
simplified example:

User 1:

Day Hiker in the SNP walks one mile on the AT yards to an overlook, spends a
few minutes and walks back to the parking lot.  Total time on or near the AT
= one hour.

User 2:

Thruhiker hikes 2160 miles in six months.

If you just count heads at that check point you get Day Hiker = 50%; Thru
Hiker = 50%

If you adjust for mileage you get Day Hiker = 0.05%; Thru Hiker = 99.95%.
assuming the thru hiker goes the entire way.

If you adjust for time you get Day Hiker = 0.02%; Thru Hiker = 99.98%.
assuming the thru hiker goes the entire way.

However, if you are talking about a sample representing the whole trail,
what about all the "thru hikers" that didn't get that far and/or the ones
that did but will go off the trail at Harpers Ferry, etc.

OTOH, the SNP is a heavily used segment of trail, by day hikers -- being
near DC.  The ratio at say Pearis Mountain would be far less day hikers than
anywhere in the SNP.  This is true of segments of the AT just a few mile
apart.  Far more day hikers will hike the two miles from Rt. 624 to Dragon's
Tooth than the next four miles south to the shelter.  Ditto Pearisburg to
Angel's Rest than from Angle's Rest to Doc's Knob.

Every maintainer could give you a list of the heavy day hiker segments in
their area.

The bottom line is that the statistics are driven as much or more by your
assumptions and model than what you are sampling.

Chainsaw

----- Original Message -----
From: kahley <kahley7@ptd.net>
To: Ron Martino <yumitori@montana.com>; <at-l@backcountry.net>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:31 AM
Subject: Trail Use was Re: [at-l] Psychology 101


> At 11:12 PM 8/12/01 -0600, Ron Martino wrote:
>
> >         Day users made up 38%, overnight/short trips 32%, section hikers
15%,
> >thru-hikers 18%. (I rounded, see the study for more exact numbers. The
> >methodology of this report seems on par with other recreational studies.
> >(Among my many sins, I study recreational management at one time.)
>
> Wow!  That percentage of thru-hikers seems amazingly high.....
> and contrary to other numbers and personal experience as
> well.  I wonder if the timing of the survey had anything to do with it?
SNIP