WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7
Results 121 to 136 of 136
  1. #121

    Default Article: AT Hiking Rates, Section by Section

    Fascinating

  2. #122
    Registered User CarolinaATMom's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-15-2012
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Age
    73
    Posts
    32
    Journal Entries
    9
    Images
    56

    Default

    What valuable tools your research offers to not only thru-hikers, but also to their families and support systems! As the mom of a 2012 AT thru-hike still on the trail, I can't tell you how much it helps to alleviate worry, offer realistic expectations and help with planning mail drop boxes. Wow - I can't imagine the time energy and mental real estate it took to do this study but I'm going to recommend it every 2013 supporter I come across and put the link in my blog. Brilliant dedicated work. Bravo!

  3. #123

    Default

    Wow, I agree with CarolinaATMom!! I'm going to share this with a group of ladies planning their 2013 hike.. this is very valuable information.

  4. #124

    Default

    My son & I are just starting the research for a potential AT thru hike. As a fellow number geek, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks, very much appreciated!!

  5. #125

    Default

    I decided to look at the journals for the hikers in this study to see if I could determine how old each hiker was. Often, in the first post or two, or on the page "about" the hiker at trailjournals.com, folks freely reveal their age. And in most other cases it's possible to deduce someone's general age, even if they don't mention a specific number (someone might say "I'm hiking after 32 years as an airline pilot" or "my boyfriend and I have decided to thru-hike after college graduation before we look for jobs"). So I looked at all the journals, putting hikers in three different age categories: younger (under 30); middle (30-49); and older (50 and older). In the end there were only a handful of the 240 journals in my study in which I could not make a very educated guess.

    Here's what I found. Of the hikers in my study:

    45% were under 30
    26% were age 30-49
    29% were 50 and older

    The conventional wisdom is that most thru-hikers are pretty young or old enough to have retired from work so I was a little surprised that there were as many as there were in the middle group. I'd be curious to know if experienced observers of thru-hikers here at WB think these numbers sound right, or if anyone knows of any surveys that have been done to try to determine the ages of thru-hikers.

    Here are the average (mean) times, and number of mean zero days, it took these various age groups to finish their thru-hikes:

    Under 30 -- 167 days to complete and 20 zero days
    30-49 -- 170 days to complete and 21 zero days
    50 and over -- 174 days to complete and 21 zero days

    These differences are not dramatic. Where the interesting difference are revealed are when we look at both age AND gender. Here are how the average (mean) numbers broke down for women keeping a journal for just themselves (no couples):

    Women under 30 -- 180 days to complete and 21 zero days
    Women 30-49 -- 179 days to complete and 22 zero days
    Women 50 and over -- 180 days to complete and 21 zero days

    The different age groups for women have amazingly similar numbers. How about for male-female couples thru-hiking together and keeping a journal? Here are the average (mean) times for them:

    M/F couples under 30 -- 182 days to complete and 25 zero days
    M/F couples 30-49 -- 172 days to complete and 21 zero days
    M/F couples 50 and over -- 179 days to complete and 16 zero days

    The desire for zero days seemed to decrease with age for these groups. I'm curious why the days to hike was a little lower for middle aged couples -- perhaps because in most cases one or both of them still had a career to get back to and didn't feel like they had unlimited time.

    But where the really pronounced differences showed up was for men keeping a solo journal. Here are their mean averages by age group:

    Men under 30 -- 154 days to complete and 17 zero days
    Men 30-49 -- 168 days to complete and 20 zero days
    Men 50 and older -- 174 days to complete and 22 zero days

    The difference in the age groups in days to complete the trail was much more pronounced among the men, for some reason. I wondered if there were a lot more men in the "younger" age group doing truly quick hikes -- that is, completing in under 130 days, something fewer than 10% of all hikers in the study were doing. But this does not seem to be the case. Here are how the numbers for "quick" hikers in the study broke down:

    52% were in the younger age group (under 30)
    29% were in the middle age group (30-49)
    19% were in the older age group (50 and over)

    They were overwhelmingly male (95%) but they weren't overwhelmingly young. The numbers above are not all that far off the percentage breakdown by age of all the hikers in the study (if you go back to the top of this post and look at those numbers).

    So in the end, looking at ages did end up showing some things of interest, I think. Another reason I did this, though, was because I've been thinking about continuing to look at hiker classes beyond 2010 (the last hiker class currently in this study), but I noticed in that last class of 2010 that the age of people journaling at trailjournals.com seemed to be changing -- only 25% of journals in that year were for hikers under 30 which is a lot lower than the 45% for the 2001-2010 period as a whole. I have speculated in the past that this change might be because younger hikers were now more likely to gravitate toward other social media for journaling rather than trailjournals.com -- places like Facebook and various non-hiking blogs.

    I think what I will do is go ahead and look at the classes of 2011 and 2012 to see if this "graying of journalists" trend is truly a trend, and then decide whether to include those classes in a future edition of the Hiking Rates study. Stay tuned.

  6. #126

    Default

    Using the database I compiled for this article, here is the list of the most popular trail towns to take zero days, listed by the percentage of hikers who zeroed there:

    84%.....Damascus VA
    61%.....Hot Springs NC
    51%.....Pearisburg VA
    50%.....Waynesboro VA
    50%.....Harpers Ferry WV
    44%.....Gorham NH
    40%.....Erwin TN
    38%.....Daleville (and Roanoke etc.) VA
    38%.....Fontana NC
    35%.....Delaware Water Gap PA
    32%.....Monson ME
    28%.....Hanover NH
    27%.....Duncannon PA
    26%.....Franklin NC
    23%.....Manchester Center VT
    22%.....Hiawasee GA
    22%.....Gatlinburg TN
    20%.....Dalton MA

    And here is a longer list of zero-day locations where at least 5% of hikers zeroed, starting in the south and proceeding north:

    Neels Gap GA (US 19, 129), 8%
    Helen, Unicoi Gap GA (GA 75), 7%
    Hiawasee GA (US 76), 22%
    Franklin NC (US 64), 26%
    Nantahala Outdoor Center NC (US 19, 74), 18%
    Fontana NC (NC 18), 38%
    Gatlinburg TN (US 441), 22%
    Standing Bear Farm NC (NC 284, I 40, Waterville School Road), 8%
    Hot Springs NC (US 25, 70), 61%
    Erwin TN, 40%
    Elk Park NC, Roan Mountain TN (US 19E), 6%
    Kincora Hostel, Laurel Fork Lodge TN (Dennis Cove Road), 13%
    Damascus VA, 84%
    Troutdale VA (VA 16), 6%
    Atkins VA (US 11), 9%
    Bland VA (US 21/52), 7%
    Pearisburg VA (US 460), 51%
    Catawba VA (VA 311, 624), 10%
    Daleville, Roanoke, etc. VA (US 11, 220), 38%
    Waynesboro VA (US 250, I 64), 50%
    Front Royal VA (US 522), 16%
    Harpers Ferry WV, 50%
    Pine Grove Furnace State Park PA, 5%
    Boiling Springs PA (PA 174), 7%
    Duncannon PA, 27%
    Port Clinton PA, 15%
    Palmerton PA (PA 873), 10%
    Delaware Water Gap PA, 35%
    Unionville NY, 5%
    Vernon NJ (NJ 94), 7%
    Bear Mountain NY, 10%
    Pawling NY (County 20), 5%
    Kent CT (CT 341), 14%
    Salisbury CT (CT 41), 6%
    Great Barrington MA (MA 23), 6%
    Upper Goose Pond Cabin MA, 5%
    Dalton MA, 20%
    North Adams MA (MA 2), 7%
    Bennington VT (VT 9), 6%
    Manchester Center VT (VT 11, 30), 23%
    Killington, Rutland, Inn at Long Trail VT (US 4), 19%
    Hanover NH, 28%
    Glencliff NH (NH 25), 13%
    Kinsman Notch NH, 5%
    Franconia Notch NH, 15%
    Crawford Notch NH, 13%
    Pinkham Notch NH, 10%
    Gorham NH (US 2), 44%
    Andover ME (East B Hill Road, South Arm Road), 15%
    Rangeley ME (ME 4), 14%
    Stratton ME (ME 27), 15%
    Caratunk ME (US 201), 7%
    Monson ME, 32%
    Baxter State Park and vicinity ME (Abol Bridge, Millinocket etc.), 14%

  7. #127

    Default

    Using the database for this study, here is how the numbers broke down by gender:

    The 165 male hikers have taken a mean 164.5 days to complete (median: 167) with 20.3 zero days (median: 18).
    The 42 female hikers have taken a mean 179.7 days to complete (median: 184) with 21.2 zero days (median: 22.5).
    The 31 M/F couples have taken a mean 178.8 days to complete (median: 180) with 22.1 zero days (median: 22).

    Here's how the numbers broke down when grouping the hikers in this study by start date:

    Jan. 1 -- Feb. 24 (22 hikers)
    Feb. 25 -- March 10 (51 hikers)
    March 11 -- March 24 (78 hikers)
    March 25 -- April 7 (56 hikers)
    April 8 -- May 20 (33 hikers)

    Here's how many mean zero days and mean total days to complete each group took:

    Zeros~~~Total Days~~~Departure Date
    26.0.............170.2..........Jan. 1 -- Feb. 24
    23.3.............174.2..........Feb. 25 -- March 10
    21.1.............173.2..........March 11 -- March 24
    18.4.............167.4..........March 25 -- April 7
    16.1.............151.0..........April 8 -- May 20

    Here is another table that has the mean departure date and arrival date for each of these five groups:

    Departure~~~Arrival~~~~Departure Range
    Feb. 13...........Aug. 2...........Jan. 1 -- Feb. 24
    March 3..........Aug. 25.........Feb. 25 -- March 10
    March 17.........Sept. 6.........March 11 -- March 24
    March 31.........Sept. 15.......March 25 -- April 7
    April 21...........Sept. 18........April 8 -- May 20

  8. #128

    Default

    My husband suggests that perhaps you have too much time on your hands, but he does not yet fully understand the AT mentality (we're working on him). I think this is brilliant, and a great use of your time! Now I can have a clear idea of the likelihood of encountering thruhikers on our sections, and when and were to be to hand out goodie bags.....thanks.

  9. #129

    Default

    WOW! Perusing all those journals and crunching all those numbers. For those that might want to know these stats you're as God send.

  10. #130

    Default

    Again, using the database for this study, for most journalists I was able to determine where these hikers were spending their nights on their thru-hikes -- shelters, tents, motels, hostels, etc. Trailjournals.com has a feature where hikers can log stats like these.

    The mean number of nights that hikers in the study spent in various places broke down like this:

    Shelters: 62 nights
    Tents or Hammocks: 53 nights
    Motels: 23 nights
    Hostels: 21 nights
    Private Homes: 9 nights

    Before they set off on a thru-hike people often try to budget for how many nights they will end up paying for housing (motel or hostel) so it seems useful to know that the mean is around 44 nights -- I believe this number is higher than what a lot of people budget for. Of course the number of nights in town is closely related to how many zero days people choose to take, so there is a pretty wide range. Even if you exclude the extremes -- the 15% who pay for the most nights of lodging and the 15% who pay for the fewest -- the range still varies from 26 nights to 62 nights in paid lodging for this "mainstream" middle 70%.

    It also interested me to compare how many nights out on the trail people were spending in shelters versus in tents /hammocks. 35% of hikers spent at least two-thirds of their trail nights in a shelter (a definite preference), 20% spent at least two-thirds of their trail nights tenting or hammocking, while around 45% were in the middle, without an overwhelming preference for either. Overall, 55% of hikers spent more nights in shelters while 45% spent more nights tenting, hammocking or sleeping under the stars. This seems to be changing subtly over time, however. For instance, in the first four years of my study, 2001-2004, 68% spent more nights in shelters, while this number had dropped to 44% preferring shelters over the alternative by the last four years in the study from 2007 to 2010. I wonder if this is due to shelters becoming more crowded in NOBO thru-hiker season as more people attempt thru-hikes each year?

    Another subtle difference is that hikers later in the study were cutting down on the number of nights spent paying for lodging in town. The mean number was about 45 in the first four years and had dropped to about 41 for the last four. There is a bit of conventional wisdom here at WB that holds that thru-hikers have become less self-reliant and more pampered as time has gone by. But based on the hikers in my study perhaps the opposite might be a possibility -- after all, it takes more effort and self reliance to pitch a tent or set up a hammock than it does to sleep in a shelter, and more recent hikers seem to be pampering themselves a little LESS with motel and hostel stays than earlier hikers.

    Admittedly, the sample size in the study is small enough that conclusions should be drawn with great caution, but I think it is food for thought.

    In my next comment I will explore how the numbers for where nights were spent thru-hiking varied by gender and age.
    Last edited by map man; 07-22-2014 at 21:54.

  11. #131

    Default

    There is very little difference between men and women when it comes to where they choose to sleep on the trail and in trail towns (that is, men and women who keep a solo journal). The percentage breakdowns for motels, hostels and nights spent in town versus spent on the trail are very similar for the genders, with the one small difference being that lone women tend to prefer shelters to tents and hammocks a little more than lone men.

    There is a big difference, though, when it comes to comparing couples and non-couples. Couples seem to seek out more privacy. They tend to prefer motels to hostels (which are more communal in nature). They spend a mean 32.5 nights in motels on a thru-hike compared to about 21.5 nights for non-couples. Couples also prefer tents to shelters with 74% of couples spending more nights in tents than shelters. Compare that with non-couples -- only 40% of them spend more nights in tents/hammocks than shelters. Moreover, on average couples spend a mean 50 nights in paid lodgings while the average is 43 for non-couples.

    When looking at age groups there are also differences -- mostly between those that are under 30 versus those that are 30 and over. The younger group has more of a preference for shelters, with 63% of them spending more nights there than in tents or hammocks. The 30 plus bunch, on the other hand, are split almost 50/50, with just 49% spending more nights in shelters than in tents/hammocks. Older hikers also spend significantly more nights in town, about 57.5 nights on a thru-hike compared to about 48 nights for the under-30s. The young, perhaps because of tighter budgets, spend a mean 37 nights in paid lodgings while that number is about 48 for those 30 and older.
    Last edited by map man; 07-22-2014 at 21:48.

  12. #132
    Registered User
    Join Date
    09-06-2014
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Age
    50
    Posts
    166

    Default

    Map Man - Thanks for all these stats. I really think they help and would like them to continue. I'm going to have to re-read this quite a few times to soak up all the info. I think maybe 2010 thru 2015 5 year update may be cool. If you have the time. I will reference the link to this article in all my journal posts and try to get more people to keep a journal on trail journals.com. I do with know with so many other options that probably seem cooler to the younger crowd its still nice to have as much info in one place.
    Keep up the good work.

  13. #133

    Default

    A little late on this, but unless I missed it somewhere there's one key piece of data I would have found very useful, as I'm planning on taking on the trail next year. Would be interesting to know how many hours per day were actually devoted to hiking, though I obviously understand why that information would not have been readily at hand to process.

  14. #134
    Registered User Cotton Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Age
    67
    Posts
    183
    Images
    3

    Default

    FWIW, I plan on taking a week off the trail in mid-May to attend my daughter in-law's graduation. I'll be somewhere between Damascus and Harpers Ferry at that time.

  15. #135
    Registered User
    Join Date
    09-29-2016
    Location
    Vass, NC
    Age
    52
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Great analysis and methodology! Speaking for just myself, this helps me tremendously as I plan my thru hike starting Feb 17. I will refer to this article a ton as I begin to take a detailed planning effort to begin. A plan is only good until the first step and then the reality of the AT takes over. Your data helps us decipher what this reality looks like. Thanks again!

  16. #136

    Default

    Great data analysis. These patterns will continue to be useful as the total numbers of hikers increases. This is very helpful for planning a thru hike. Thank You for all your hard work compiling this and for sharing it!

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •