Leave No Trace

1
Leave No Trace
2
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)
No Limits
Limits Same
Limits Different
Closed
Total
Agency

N
N
N
N



N
99
82.5
13
10.8
7
5.8
1
0.8
120
BLM
82
27.4
209
69.9
8
2.7
0
0.0
299
USFS
52
77.6
5
7.5
2
3.0
8
11.9
USFWS
67
NPS
11
28.9
52.6
6
15.8
1
2.6
20
38
Total
244
46.6
4.4
10
1.9
524
247
47.1
23
1 It is possible for the area to have no group
size limits (No Limits), to have the same
limits for all users (LimitsSame), to have
different limits for different user types
(LimitsDifferent), or to be closed or
inaccessible to the public (Closed).
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder (See
H.O. for full attribution)
3
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)
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder
(See H.O. for full attribution)
4
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)
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder
(See H.O. for full attribution)
5
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
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder
(See H.O. for full attribution)
6
Group impact on others 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 the lowest
of ranked problems
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder
(See H.O. for full attribution)
7
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
From Wilderness party size regulations,
Monz, Roggenbuck, Cole, Brame, and Yoder
(See H.O. for full attribution)
8
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
9
Just what is a group, anyway? (2 of 2)
Self Train
Intra Comm
Plan Ahead
Self Police
Inter Comm
Tradition
S
S
S
S
M
Family group (forever!) Organized group (long
term) Organized group (short term) Ad hoc
group (long term) Ad hoc group (short term)
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
M
M
M
S
M
-
F
F
L
-
L
-
F
L
L
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Random collection of individuals
S strong M moderate F Fair
L low
10
What do we mean when we say group?
100 50 - 100 20 - 50 10 - 30 3 - dozen 2 - 4
BIG groups
Smallish groups
11
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
12
Where can a group go to use the outdoors?
Friendly Private Lands
Public Wilderness
Public Frontcountry
Own Organizations Lands
Public Backcountry
Less restrictions on access
More restrictions on access
13
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
14
Boy Scouts - a case study in group use ( 2 of 5 )
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
15
Boy Scouts - a case study in group use ( 3 of 5 )
BSA Adults New campers All ages (18 to ?) Wide
range of physical fitness Structured training
program Strong tradition base Youth
protection Volunteers
16
Boy Scouts - a case study in group use ( 4 of 5 )
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)
17
Boy Scouts - a case study in group use ( 5 of 5 )
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 overfor a
long time!)
18
It aint just the Scouts!
4-H Clubs Schools Church groups Adventure therapy
groups Outward Bound Private camps JROTC Klan
19
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?