leave no trace. how big a deal is group size limits? table 1. wilderness area group size limits by...

Leave No Trace

How big a deal is group size limits?

Table 1. Wilderness area group size limits by management agency1

(81% of areas in National Wilderness Preservation System responding)

1 It is possible for the area to have no group size limits (No Limits), to have the same limits for all users (Limits—Same), to have different limits for different user types (Limits—Different), or to be closed or inaccessible to the public (Closed).

Agency

No Limits

Limits – Same

Limits – Different

Closed Total

N N N N% % % % N

BLM

USFS

USF&WS

NPS

Total

99

52

82

11

244

82.5

27.4

77.6

28.9

46.6

13

209

5

20

247

10.8

69.9

7.5

52.6

47.1

7

8

2

6

5.8

2.7

3.0

15.8

4.4

1

0

8

1

10

0.8

0.0

11.9

2.6

1.9

120

299

67

38

52423

From: Wilderness party size regulations:…, Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder (See H.O. for full attribution)

Why impose group restrictions?

Environmental impacts (81%)

Consistency with neighboring wilderness areas (50%)

Conflict between groups (47%)

Overall high use of area (42%)

Facility/site constraints (39%)

Public complaints and pressure (24%)

Conflict within groups (6%)


Group impact on the environment? ( 1 of 2 )

Firewood consumption (positive?)

Wildlife disturbance (positive)

Vegetation/soil damage - impacted areas (neutral)

Vegetation/soil damage - pristine areas (negative)

Vegetation/soil damage - impacted areas that are too small for group to fit into (negative)


Group impact on the environment? ( 2 of 2 )

Firewood consumption (positive?)

Wildlife disturbance (positive)

Vegetation/soil damage - impacted areas (neutral)

Vegetation/soil damage - pristine areas (negative)

Vegetation/soil damage - impacted areas that are too small for group to fit into (negative)


Science

Common- sense

Group impact on other’s wilderness experience?

Hikers generally support group size limits (75+%)

Much smaller numbers say that seeing a large group was even a slight problem (20-30%)

Most rank “group size” among thelowest of ranked problems


General conclusions

Group size limits are a common management approach toward limiting ecological and social impacts

Beyond limiting very large groups, it is not clear how group size limits have helped reduce impacts

More research needed on ecological and visitor experience implications of group size

Careful cost/benefit evaluation is needed when setting group size limits


Just what is a “group”, anyway? (1 of 2)

Family group (forever!)

Organized group (long term)

Organized group (short term)

Ad hoc group (“long” term)

Ad hoc group (short term)

Random collection of individuals

more“groupness”

less“groupness”

Just what is a “group”, anyway? (2 of 2)

Family group (forever!)

Organized group (long term)

Organized group (short term)

Ad hoc group (“long” term)

Ad hoc group (short term)

“Inter”Comm

PlanAhead

SelfPolice

Self Train

“Intra”Comm

Tradition

S = strong M = moderate F = Fair L = low

S S S SSM

S S S S S S

S M M M S M

- F F L - L

- F L L - -

- - - - - -Random collection of individuals

What do we mean when we say “group”?

100+

50 - 100

20 - 50

10 - 30

3 - dozen

2 - 4

BIGgroups

Smallishgroups

What are we comparing groups against?

Groups of similar type

All other groups

Equivalent size collections of random individuals

“Normal” load of random individuals for area

No human impacts at all

Apples&

Apples

Apples&

Oranges

Where can a group go to use the outdoors?

“Friendly” Private Lands

Less restrictionson access

More restrictionson access

PublicWilderness

PublicFrontcountry

PublicBackcountry

OwnOrganization’s

Lands

Boy Scouts - a case study in group use ( 1 of 5 )

Educational (not recreational) organization

Major elements of the BSA educational program are

designed to work best in the outdoors

In a well-run Scout unit, good outdoor fun is a byproduct of

the educational program, not a goal in itself


BSA Youth

New campers

Adolescents & teens

Teams are key training method

Youth leadership is a key training method

Ideals/values = outdoor citizenship

Structured training program


BSA Adults

New campers

All ages (18 to …?)

Wide range of physical fitness

Structured training program

Strong “tradition” base

Youth protection

Volunteers


A sense of scale - annual outdoor use (est.)

50,000+ Troops

17,000+ Crews

enjoy

300,000+ weekend trips (unit size)

10,000+ weekend multi-group encampments (20+ units)

5,000+ week-long trips (unit size)

1,000+ week-long multi-group encampments (20+ units)


A sense of scale - LNT ”training” potential (est.)

4,000,000+ BSA youth and adults

can potentially indirectly influence (at some level)

the outdoor behaviors of an estimated

20,000,000

outdoor users

(over and over and over…for a long time!)

It ain’t just the Scouts!

4-H

Clubs

Schools

Church groups

Adventure therapy groups

Outward Bound

Private camps

JROTC

Klan

A last thought on limiting group use!

Should there be something about group membership

that causes a citizen to start loosing their rights

to enjoy their own public lands…?

- Or -

Could it be that groups are sometimes

just the easiest target

for regulation?

leave no trace. how big a deal is group size limits? table 1. wilderness area group size limits by...

Documents