mtn_mouse Posted January 9, 2006 Posted January 9, 2006 I notice on Mr. Skoog's excellent online annual journal concerning local alpinism a story from Park Service documenting a decline in numbers of climbers in N. Cascades on the order of 25% over past four or five years. Apparently some but not all may be weather-related for most recent year. Has anyone noticed this and/or have any theories why it may be so? Has Rainier, Denali, Tetons etc., shown similar decline? Just look on the bright side, Snafflehound numbers are increasing! Quote
Dru Posted January 9, 2006 Posted January 9, 2006 too many climbers, ppl whine about crag overpopulation, erosion, can't get a permit, can't get campsite, whaaa not enough climbers, different problems, same whaaa Quote
Mike_Gauthier Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 Thread revival... I followed this thread, but waited to get our final numbers. I'll post more information on my blog (which as you can see, I'm heavily promoting ) at: www.mountrainierclimbing.blogspot.com. Year: 2000= 13,114 Year: 2001= 11,874 Year: 2002= 11,313 Year: 2003= 9,897 Year: 2004= 9,251 Year: 2005= 8,972 Quote
catbirdseat Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 The falling numbers are being reflected in declining enrollment in climbing courses. Mountaineers Basic Climbing numbers are off. Interestingly, Intermediate level climbing enrollment is holding steady. Quote
Squid Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 For comparison, the number of registered climbers for Denali: 2001 1,305 2002 1,232 2003 1,179 2004 1,275 2005 1,340 I would have expected the numbers & trends of registered climbers to track pretty closely between Rainier and Denali. I'm surprised to see the trends be so divergent. I'm sure you've thought about this- what do you suppose is behind the two trends? Quote
Mike_Gauthier Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I'm also hearing "through the rumor mill" that the numbers are also down on Hood, Shasta, in the Tetons, and in other mountaineering areas... I think Denali is the one major destination that seems steady however. I wonder if it's b/c of the international attention? Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 They changed a hand hold or two on the sit start to Ranier. Its a greasy sloper now. Quote
Mike_Gauthier Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 For comparison, the number of registered climbers for Denali: 2001 1,305 2002 1,232 2003 1,179 2004 1,275 2005 1,340 I would have expected the numbers & trends of registered climbers to track pretty closely between Rainier and Denali. I'm surprised to see the trends be so divergent. I'm sure you've thought about this- what do you suppose is behind the two trends? Hey, we just posted at the same time. Jinx... I have wondered this too. I suspect Denali "7 summits" status helps... Quote
Squid Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I think people are scared of Rainier because they know the evil dark lord lurks there. Quote
Mike_Gauthier Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 I think people are scared of Rainier because they know the evil dark lord lurks there. Everyone knows that the evil dark lord is actually a good guy in big black suit with a jedi heart of gold. Quote
catbirdseat Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 Here's the 2000 Census Data. The population is getting older. Age Percent Under 5 years 6.7 5 to 9 years 7.2 10 to 14 years 7.4 15 to 19 years 7.3 20 to 24 years 6.6 25 to 34 years 14.3 35 to 44 years 16.5 45 to 54 years 14.4 55 to 59 years 4.8 60 to 64 years 3.6 65 to 74 years 5.7 75 to 84 years 4.1 85 years and over 1.4 Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 And they're all on viagra. They've got other things to climb than Rainier. Quote
catbirdseat Posted March 8, 2006 Posted March 8, 2006 And they're all on viagra. They've got other things to climb than Rainier. Brilliant analysis! This guy is sharp. Quote
Choada_Boy Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Maybe it has to do with PRICES! Not cheap to play the game these days... Quote
Johnny_Tuff Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Maybe it has to do with PRICES! Not cheap to play the game these days... Stop sniveling. You get what you pay for. Suck it up and send. Quote
Ade Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Maybe it has to do with PRICES! Not cheap to play the game these days... Only if you believe that you need half this shite to do the sort of climbing most people do. Let's face it you don't need a $500 dead bird pack to hike Rainier. Quote
Choada_Boy Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Hopefully people will KEEP thinking they need to shell out $8000 to get into climbing! Quote
tyree Posted March 25, 2006 Posted March 25, 2006 Mabey its because people realize that climbing (esp in the MTS) is a whole lot of SUFFERING!!!! If you want to get stuff done in the Cascades you cant always just stroll out to the MTS and send. No, there are bushes, bugs, rain, sweat oh yeah and its fucking SCARY! Who wants to spend all of this time and energy, not to mention money when there is all of that good stuff to watch on TV! Quote
climb_ca Posted March 31, 2006 Posted March 31, 2006 (edited) i've gotta go with the prana fashion line argument. oh, and Jon Krakauer. if you want my complete rant, it's here: Outdoor Industry's Next Victim: Mountaineering? Edited March 31, 2006 by climb_ca Quote
Choada_Boy Posted March 31, 2006 Posted March 31, 2006 Good riddance to bad rubbish, both the "outdoor industry" parasites and the clots that think they can buy their way to the top like they see in the movies. Quote
RuMR Posted March 31, 2006 Posted March 31, 2006 especially those suckers that buy those lame helmet gimmicky things, eh?? Quote
letsroll Posted March 31, 2006 Posted March 31, 2006 -I am not too sad to see the masses leave the outdoors. However it will create a $$ crunch for the roads and trails I like to use to get to my climbs. - As for the drop on rainier and shasta it might be that you have to pay to climb and getting a camp reservation is a PITA, as well as seeing all those people near me. Maybe the general public wants a more wilderness experience when they climb, but the rub for them is that you have to pay your dues on the crowded climbs to get the experience to get to the seldom used routes to get that wilderness experience. -as for the generational change I will have to agree. I coach high school track and the kids that I see now vs. when I was in high school (even 6 years ago) are less tolerent of suffering. I have had to make my workouts easier for them, not only to retain them in the sport but so I don't brake them. Also there is this attitude of "well if I am not good at it when I first try then I will never be good at it and I might as well give up." You think numbers are declining what a couple more years and you will see a real drop. Quote
Dechristo Posted March 31, 2006 Posted March 31, 2006 I coach high school track ...I have had to make my workouts easier for them ...so I don't brake them. Yeah, don't brake 'em if you want 'em to run fast. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.