Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70205923

Research Note: How old are the people who die in avalanches? A look into the ages of avalanche victims in the United States (1950-2018)

Erich Peitzsch·Sara Boilen·Karl W. Birkeland·Spencer Logan
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Since the winter of 1950-1951, 1084 individuals perished in snow avalanches in the United States. In this study, we analyze the ages of those killed (n=900) by applying non-parametric methods to annual median ages and for age groups and primary activity groups. Change point detection results suggest a significant change in 1990 in the median age of avalanche fatalities. Significant positive trends exist for both the 1950 to 2018 and 1990 to 2018 median age of victims. The median age of victims from 1950 to 1989 is 27 and 33 from 1990 to 2018. Since 1990, the 30-39 and 40-49 age groups are the only age category to exhibit a positive trend in the number of fatalities. There is no significant difference in median ages between snowmobilers and other categories. These results can be used to enhance avalanche education and forecasting efforts in the United States.

Explore related subjects

Journal of Outdoor Recreation and TourismArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Erich Peitzsch, Sara Boilen, Karl W. Birkeland, Spencer Logan. 2019. Research Note: How old are the people who die in avalanches? A look into the ages of avalanche victims in the United States (1950-2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2019.100255

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2025

Monitoring visitor activity and informal trail disturbance in Yosemite Valley meadows to assess temporal changes in use and impacts

Montane meadows provide vital habitat that supports ecosystems, regulate hydrological processes, and offer valuable recreational opportunities. Meadows account for 3 % of Yosemite National Park's area, including Yosemite Valley, and are particularly susceptible to human impacts such as formation of informal trails. We collected observational data on visitor activity and quantified social trail disturbance to compare with resource monitoring datasets and through similar parameters to Walden-Schreiner and Leung (2013) who studied visitor use and behavior in three Yosemite Valley meadows in 2011. We documented change in number of visitors per hour and primary activity pursued. We also compared trends of meadow disturbance (informal trail length and disturbed area) from the early 2000s - 2023. Informal trail length at El Capitan Meadow decreased from 2004 to 2018, followed by recent increases. Disturbed area for Cooks A, Sentinel A, Slaughterhouse B, Stoneman A, and Stoneman B sub-meadows increased from 2006 to 2023. Between 2011 and 2023, the proportion of those engaged in active versus stationary pursuits showed that visitors engaged in more active pursuits in two of three meadows. Moreover, there were >3.5 times more visitors per hour in Cooks, El Capitan, and Leidig meadows in 2023 compared to 2011, yet, most visitors utilized designated trails. Meadow locational context was linked to activity preference and types of impacts. Management strategies, such as fencing and signage have been effective at minimizing impacts in several meadows. Parsing nuances of informal trail use and drivers of disturbance for various meadows is crucial for informed park management decisions and actions.

California↗
USGS2024

Perceived constraints to participating in wildlife-related recreation

Wildlife-related recreationists play an important role in conservation. Understanding constraints to wildlife-related activities is critical for maintaining or increasing participation in activities like birdwatching and hunting. A mail-out survey was administered to a generalized sample representative of U.S. residents (i.e., not specific to birdwatching or hunting) in early 2017 to determine what would limit them from participating in birdwatching and hunting (n = 1030). We employed a concurrent nested mixed-methods design: open-ended responses were thematically coded qualitatively in two distinct cycles (i.e., inductive, and then mixed inductive-deductive coding), and then the probability of expressing the second cycle codes was quantitatively modeled using multinomial logit models for the respective activities. Doing so empirically determined various groups’ constraints that are important to recruitment, retention, and reactivation (R 3 ) efforts for birdwatching and hunting. We found that the likelihood of experiencing unique constraints varied based on sociodemographic characteristics, and these relationships differed between birdwatching and hunting. Gender had a limited effect on constraints to birdwatching but was a strong indicator of intrapersonal constraints and limitations to involvement in hunting. The likelihood of expressing structural constraints decreased with age for both activities. Possessing strong social ties to the activities tended to reduce the likelihood of expressing constraints overall but this was especially true for hunting. Our findings inform R 3 efforts for wildlife-related recreation and provide direct results that organizations can apply in seeking to help Americans negotiate constraints and increase and diversify participation in wildlife-related recreation and conservation behavior.

Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism↗
USGS2024

Trail sustainability broadly defined

In this paper we provide a concise yet comprehensive examination of the importance and sustainability of trail networks, considering a diverse array of perspectives. Sustainability related to recreation infrastructure elements has been variously defined, with different disciplines often only considering one or two aspects of sustainability. In the context of trail networks, we suggest that there must be an equilibrium or harmony between human uses and the long-term sustainable management of the trail network's infrastructure, its protections of environmental and historic/cultural resources, and provision of diverse socio-economic benefits to visitors and surrounding communities. While trail sustainability has often been narrowly defined as accommodating visitation while minimizing environmental degradation, we emphasize a broader definition that encompasses four interconnected domains: managerial, resource, social, and economic. We suggest that a network of trails cannot be truly sustainable until scientists, land managers, and trail stewards fully consider and effectively address each of these dimensions.

Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism↗