Back

Know before you go! A field survey of the preparedness of wilderness day hikers and trail runners in Rocky Mountain National Park

Lambert, J. T.; Hamer, D. H.; Weckstein, T. N.; Wellenius, G.

2025-09-25 epidemiology
10.1101/2025.09.23.25336486 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionActively recreating in natural environments enhances physical and mental health, but also carries risk. We aimed to characterize wilderness day hikers and trail runners, and examine factors that predict preparedness. MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey in 4 distinct areas of Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) in Colorado during June-August of 2024. English-speaking adults returning from a day hike or trail run were invited to participate. We classified visitors as prepared based on the gear they reported carrying. ResultsOf 801 potential participants approached, 586 (82.3%) day hikers and 68 (76.4%) trail runners agreed to participate. The overall average age was 40.7 years (range 18-82); 50.1% were female; and most common state of residence was Colorado (47.3%). Day hikers tended to be older, travel in larger groups, and spend fewer days in the wilderness per year while trail runners reported higher levels of experience and wilderness preparedness, and were more likely to experience close calls. A minority of participants met our definition of wilderness prepared, about half were altitude prepared, and approximately a quarter did not tell anyone where they were going and when they expected to return. Several measures of experience were associated with preparedness. ConclusionsBoth equipment and knowledge are important for safely enjoying and leaving wilderness settings. Yet many wilderness users in RMNP did not meet our definition of adequate preparation, especially those with less experience. Additional efforts to increase the proportion of wilderness day-users who are prepared may help further improve visitor safety.

Published in Wilderness & Environmental Medicine · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.