[cdt-l] Numbers

[Campy]

Hi:

Yes - lots of ways to slice statistics. The overall downward trend in 
hiker numbers is detectable in a variety of ways. In 1987 we chose the 
following slice when we decided to sell our mountaineering equipment 
business (Mountain High Ltd.) in 1987:

"How many colleges still schedule backpacking courses?".

When the forest service's wilderness permit program continued to expand 
and the college backpacking course offerings dropped to zero, we sold.
==^=== Campy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 563 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20070718/f5caf0b7/attachment.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: unknown.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 24442 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20070718/f5caf0b7/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
  http://www.trailprojects.com click on PCT
Time spent doing trail work shall not be deducted from your life!
===^==
On Jul 18, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Jonathan Ley wrote:

> There are a lot of ways to slice statistics. Numbers might be up for
> individual parks, but down overall... also, national parks are only one
> measure, and doesn't include large wilderness areas, national forests,
> blm lands and more... Plus, things like bad forest fire seasons, 
> floods,
> and just a season of bad summer-weekend weather can affect numbers of
> backcountry visits. For example, the number of people using the Mt.
> Rainier NP backcountry will be WAY down this year... but because of
> massive trail damage & a lengthy park closure due to flooding.
>
> Anyway, that's one reason I liked the "people survey" instead of the
> "National park" numbers.
>
> Likewise, the totals for funding dollars can easily be mis-leading.
> First, there are differences between agencies - (national parks,
> national monuments, forest service, blm, etc..) some of which aren't
> even in the same department (agriculture vs. interior). Also, there are
> differences between funding for roads, front-country improvements,
> motorized-use trails, hiking trails, etc... Depending on the report, it
> could be interpreted any number of ways.
>
> Anyway, for one snapshot & an interesting read, see this just today:
> http://www.wta.org/~wta/cgi-bin/wtaweb.pl?4+blog+thread+ed+378
>
> Sorry this is kind-of drifting from the topic of the CDT specifically,
> but I think in the big picture it can apply there too...
>
> -Jonathan
>
>
> RICHARD MALLERY wrote:
>> I don't know how numbers equate to wilderness protection but I do not
>> need data to tell me if usage is up or down. When I can call a
>> National Park and get a backcountry reservation without feeling like
>> I'm in a crap game I will know that backcountry use is waning. I'm
>> trying to get a permit for a 200 mile Sept. loop of Glacier and so far
>> I can't get into half the sites I need to. This is after most of the
>> visitors have left and half the ranger staff--yet the campgrounds seem
>> full. Maybe Glacier should allow mountain bikers so that they could
>> fill all their vacancies.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-l mailing list
>> cdt-l at backcountry.net
>> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-l mailing list
> cdt-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/cdt-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 2735 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/cdt-l/attachments/20070718/f5caf0b7/attachment-0001.bin