Bushwalk Australia

A recent survey in a moderately sized bushwalking club with a long history, produced a demographic which showed that the average age of participants in the survey was 52 years, and less than 20% were under 45 years.
While I can't find comparable data, 55% of the Australian population are under 39 years and the median is 34 years and increasing, so the age profile is not likely to get younger on its own.

Many Clubs have a similar high proportion of Baby Boomers (BD 1946-1964) and few members below 45 years old, who make up the Generation X's (BD 1965-1979) and Generation Y's (BD 1980-1994).

Does your Club need more Gen X & Gen Y members, and if so why?

Thankyou Bush_Walker for defining just what is Gen X and Y in terms of year of D of B even though it's clarification wasn't necessarily the primary intention of this thread. I was never sure of the dates. I've generally read about Gen X and Y in terms of their musical taste, spending habits and various other foibles and they can at times sound like a most disagreeable lot! Well compared with us wonderful Baby Boomers anyway! Can the three age groups co-exist? In a club social environment I certainly think so, but on certain walks anyway, I'm not so sure. That's no reason though why the different Gens can't share the same club environment of course. And I think that club history is very important and can possibly be part of a club's attraction to younger people. Certainly, clubs ought to try and attract them.

I was thinking of re-establishing my membership with the University club I once belonged to (and which at the time practically defined my life but at the expense of decent academic grades) so that I can get get back into that young scene - spontaneity, energy, foolishness, wild parties (oh how I dream!) but would they except ME! I'm afraid that I might be still living out the fantasy that I'm young and I continue to fool myself of this by ignoring the reality of signs that the body ain't always what it used to be. I only have to try and climb a typical student day's test piece on the wall of a Uni building to realize the truth of this. Or maybe I just need to train more.

Many years ago I recall and uncle of mine telling me that "This age thing, I feel just the same as when I was 18 years old, the only difference is that the body doesn't work as well." This gave me a bit of a shock - how can anyone bear to die if they feel like an 18 year old even when they're as old as my uncle. I got an even bigger shock about 30 years later when it dawned on me that he was ONLY IN HIS EARLY 60'S AT THE TIME! GASP!! Or am I getting off the subject? Sorry if so.



.

mikethepike wrote:Can the three age groups co-exist? In a club social environment I certainly think so, but on certain walks anyway, I'm not so sure. That's no reason though why the different Gens can't share the same club environment of course. And I think that club history is very important and can possibly be part of a club's attraction to younger people. Certainly, clubs ought to try and attract them.

Thanks mikethepike for your input.

I suspect that there are some older Club members who don't want younger members (X's & Y's) and find them an annoyance. Unfortunately that attitude will not only deter younger members from remaining but will also lead to the collapse of many Clubs as the "baby boomers" cohort ( the youngest are now almost 50) moves through, leaving nothing to replace it.

Personally I like to belong to a Club with a wide age profile. Some of my most enjoyable walks have been due to conversations with people much older and much younger than myself

Many community organisations have realised that they need to do something about their age profiles and have produced reports based on research within their organisations.

Some well known organisations which have done this are:

Country Fire Authority (CFA) (Vic) Is Generation Y a Threat to the Status Quo? Meeting the expectations of a multi-generational fire service
Surf Lifesaving (SLSA) Engaging Millennium Youths Surf Life Saving Australia


Does anyone know of other organisations?

Some questions for discussion, some more controversial than others:

Is the lack of new Gen x and Y's in your Club, hidden by an influx of 50+ members?
How will a lack of younger members change your Club over the next 5-10 years?
Is the large number of 50+ members preventing younger people from joining your Club?
Is the large number of older members preventing the changes necessary to attract more younger members?

Don't mean to hit a nerve here, but what is this obsession with formalising "clubs"? Honestly, what's wrong with walking with a few good mates?

Strider wrote:Don't mean to hit a nerve here, but what is this obsession with formalising "clubs"? Honestly, what's wrong with walking with a few good mates?

Hi strider

There is no obsession. The problems I have been discussing only apply to those who belong to Clubs and there are many thousands who do so.

There is nothing "wrong" with walking with a few mates. I do it all the time. However, not everyone is so lucky to find walking mates outside of a Club context!

I have only belonged to a club for 3 or 4 years and prior to that did exactly what you said for 25 years. There comes a time however when the skills level of your mates may be less than is needed, they are unavailable at that time of the year or their fitness drops away.

Do you then stop walking, perhaps advertise on Facebook or this forum?

Well theres your answer there, you dont need younger people in your club, because when they are younger they can walk with mates and then as they get older they will join a club. People are always getting old so you should always have 'new blood' coming in to your club.

Thanks french_84

frenchy_84 wrote:Well theres your answer there, you dont need younger people in your club, because when they are younger they can walk with mates and then as they get older they will join a club. People are always getting old so you should always have 'new blood' coming in to your club.

You are making a false assumption: viz that when you belong to a Club, you don't walk with mates.

My last half dozen Club walks have included up to half a dozen people who I would normally call mates; people who I meet socially on a regular basis outside of a bushwalking context.

Bush Walker wrote:Thanks french_84

frenchy_84 wrote:Well theres your answer there, you dont need younger people in your club, because when they are younger they can walk with mates and then as they get older they will join a club. People are always getting old so you should always have 'new blood' coming in to your club.

You are making a false assumption: when you belong to a Club, you don't walk with mates.

Um.. No, he isn't. He said you can walk without a club but with your mates when you are young, and you are likely to join a club when you are older. He didn't infer anything about mates and clubs not existing together.

But you assumed he did...

I have started a new thread to discuss the benefits/disadvantages of Clubs as we were getting a little off-topic, IMHO.

Bushwalking Clubs: the good, bad and ugly

To keep our discussion in context I have collated the relevant bushwalking stats from ABS 4177.0 - Participation in Sport and Physical Recreation, Australia, 2009-10

It doesn't allow me to compare participation rates in bushwalking organisations prior to 2005-2006 but I am still looking.

If you have any stats please let me know.

Ummm... doesn't that say that gen x and y aren't likely to want to be in a bushwalking club? The target market seems to be fifty year olds, and they seem to prefer not being in a club anyway.

photohiker wrote:
So history tells us that participation in bushwalking peaks at ages 45-54.
We also have anecdotal evidence that X/Y gen prefer informal walks with mates outside of club structures.
Why do you think that it is a problem that X/Y Gen are not currently participating in BW clubs as much as baby boomers? Do you have any reason to believe that when they reach 45-54 they will not be interested in bushwalking, and not join bushwalking clubs?

Two interesting questions, for which I don't have answers and anyone claiming to do so would be very brave.

The comments from forum members do however seem to support the common stereotypes for Gen X, Y and the baby boomers which would affect their club membership. Comments previously made would suggest that many baby boomers (48-66 yo) may now have more free time and hence be able to devote more time to leisure activities. They also make up a large component of the population, so simply on that basis, we would expect to see large numbers in bushwalking clubs..

Miyata610 wrote:Ummm... doesn't that say that gen x and y aren't likely to want to be in a bushwalking club? The target market seems to be fifty year olds, and they seem to prefer not being in a club anyway.

Miyata610: I can't see how you get that from the stats I quoted from ABS. Can you explain?

Bush Walker wrote:
Miyata610: I can't see how you get that from the stats I quoted from ABS. Can you explain?

Easy... The participation rate is very low for gen x and y age groups. Ergo they don't want to go bushwalking. The rate's highest for 50 year olds. Ergo they do. Regardless, the vast majority of bush walkers don't want organized events 85.3%. Don't clubs organize events? If so they don't want to be in clubs.

Miyata610 wrote:

Bush Walker wrote:
Miyata610: I can't see how you get that from the stats I quoted from ABS. Can you explain?

Easy... The participation rate is very low for gen x and y age groups. Ergo they don't want to go bushwalking. The rate's highest for 50 year olds. Ergo they do. Regardless, the vast majority of bush walkers don't want organized events 85.3%. Don't clubs organize events? If so they don't want to be in clubs.

Thanks Miyata610 for the logic lesson above; based on the data I gave, I have no disagreement.

What can we do to make bushwalking more attractive to Gen X & Y
Can we change bushwalking clubs so they more people want to join?

Any ideas?

Ideas? I'm not qualified to answer. I choose to be a non member. Do we really need to try and increase participation? Does it matter?

Bush Walker wrote:What can we do to make bushwalking more attractive to Gen X & Y

That's easy. Wait til they are in the age bracket that bushwalking becomes attractive to. Nothing else to do.

Can we change bushwalking clubs so they more people want to join?

Well, you could try, but the statisitics are against you. Gen X/Y are busy people, some might like bushwalking with their mates but they don't need no club for that.

Wouldn't it be better to expand your reach into the target age group than wringing your hands about people who mostly won't be interested for another 20 years?

Just make sure the club is open and friendly to new entrants of any age. Kick the fuddie duddies off the board by mandating maximum terms and you'll be mostly set.

Miyata610 wrote:Ideas? I'm not qualified to answer. I choose to be a non member. Do we really need to try and increase participation? Does it matter?

I suppose it matters if you are running a club and want to see it continue.

Marketing 101 tells you to choose your target market carefully. It would seem to me from the statistics presented, that the target market should be the 45-54 group but that should by no means be a static thing. You change your marketing to fit the prevailing trends, so if suddenly the 15-24 group decide they want to take up bushwalking en masse, you start targetting them, but that supposes your club has the flexibility to quickly shift focus and I suspect reality is a little different.

As to how you do it - no idea. I guess if clubs had exclusive rights of access to certain places that would make them more attractive to join. Maybe push the social aspect. These days it seems you have to have some sort of internet forum for members to communicate, so make sure you have a club website up and running.

Bush Walker wrote:A recent survey in a moderately sized bushwalking club with a long history, produced a demographic which showed that the average age of participants in the survey was 52 years, and less than 20% were under 45 years.

For another club with a long history, and analysing the whole membership plus those who have left in the last couple of years, the numbers are:



This looks like this:



The under 19s are grandchildren being introduced to bushwalking and camping.

One thing that must be recognised in all this is that some people are members but are not active, ie, they go on no or very few trips per year. This is more likely to be the older ones who have more money and will pay membership fees just for the social contact and newsletters.

This would halve the 70-79 group, and knock all the others down a bit.

mikethepike wrote:Can the three age groups co-exist? In a club social environment I certainly think so, but on certain walks anyway, I'm not so sure.

When I joined my club in 1983 and for about 10-15 years after, there were multiple generations on almost every walk. It was quite endearing to see a 15 year old walking down the track in deep conversation with a 60 year old.

I'd like to thank the large number of forum members, probably 40+, who have spent time and, in some cases a significant amount, to contribute to the discussion we are having about the ageing of bushwalking clubs and the possible solutions. I also appreciate the contributions from those who are not club members, but have still made useful comments.

There are three other active threads, two of which contain polls, to which you might like to contribute.

Is your Club Size Diminishing and your Membership Ageing? POLL [183/2615]
How Does Your Club Use Social Media? VOTE IN THE POLL POLL [10/216]
Bushwalking Clubs: the good, bad and the ugly [21/339]

Over this weekend I intend to spend some time looking back over these and will place some sort of summary on the wiki including the graphs, under clubs.

If you have not already "voted" in either of the polls, please do so as the data is fairly scarce at the moment.

If you are a Gen X or Y person reading this post and you were thinking about joining a bush walking club ... what do you think now after reading this thread?

One of the reasons why I left a bush walking club was that meetings were becoming less-and-less about walking and planning, or inviting guest lecturers or learning bushcraft and navigational skills, and just generally socialising. Meetings were frequently about changing the constitution, re-submitting amendments, time-and-time again. A club only needs one or two overly political people to change the entire nature of a club, from a social club to a political advocacy group.

People overly concerned about this sort of membership stuff, are also most likely to be obsessed with OH&S, certainly into changing the clubs constitution, always proposing amendments for only god knows why, over-regulating the walks and in favour of increasing commitments and obligations for walk leaders, to the point where leading a walk, is a sentence not a joy. Perhaps to justify to themselves for their being in a club's hierarchy ... that could mean that you're not joining a bushwalking social club, so much as joining a political and advocacy group.

There is a anagram MOHA as in, I no longer belong to a MOHA. A Miserable Old Hikers Association.

One thing clubs should do is have their upfront people, the phone contact people, who give the first impressions of a club ... at least be gifted with some social skills. I talked to a club person recently. I've been thinking about rejoining a club, and the conversation started with a lecture from him about OH&S and then ... I was squeezing blood out of a stone for information. It is much easier wandering-off into the bush alone or with a girl friend and not worrying about how old people actually are.

Warren.

WarrenH wrote: club only needs one or two overly political people to change the entire nature of a club from a social club to a political advocacy group.

And there are a few of them on here. (Professional comittee people)

Some spend too much time trying to organise others and not enough time in the bush.

FF

WarrenH wrote:There is a anagram MOHA as in, I no longer belong to a MOHA. A Miserable Old Hikers Association.

One thing clubs should do is have their upfront people, whose are the phone contact people, that give the first impressions of a club ... at least be gifted with some social skills. I talked to a club person recently. I've been thinking about rejoining a club, and the conversation started with lecture from him about OH&S and then ... I was squeezing blood out of a stone for information. It is much easier wandering-off into the bush alone or with a girl friend and not worrying about how old people actually are.

Warren.

I'm not on [offyour]facebook, but if I were, I'd 'like' this post Warren.

It's about the bush and enjoying it. Not all clubs suffer the affliction mentioned, but as soon as they do, its usually time to leave. Not just Bushwalking clubs either. I also share your 'wandering off' notion. I do that. A lot.

x2

Bush Walker wrote:

We need to be careful in attaching too much meaning to these figures. Given that there was no real definition of bushwalking, the figures will likely include people who go for a stroll on a track after a barbecue lunch, people who walk though a bushy park in suburbia, people who wander around unprepared in a national park and get lost, etc.

You can almost see this in the figures, where the number under 45 is almost the same as the number over 45, quite different to the profiles of most clubs. Could this be young families going for a picnic or barbecue followed by a short walk?

There are about 600 people in clubs in the Newcastle area. Lets assume there are 6 times that number bushwalk but are not in clubs, giving a total of about 4000 people.

The population of the Newcastle region is just over half a million people, so bushwalkers make up around 0.8% of the total population of the Newcastle region.

There are a couple of qualifications to this calculation.

Firstly, I suspect that Newcastle may have a higher club membership rate than most other places so this figure is probably a bit high to represent the country as a whole.

Secondly, the 6:1 ratio could be challenged. I got that ratio from the organised/non-organised part of the table. The people I mentioned above would fall into the non-organised category so excluding them would reduce the ratio somewhat.

davidmorr wrote:We need to be careful in attaching too much meaning to these figures. Given that there was no real definition of bushwalking, the figures will likely include people who go for a stroll on a track after a barbecue lunch, people who walk though a bushy park in suburbia, people who wander around unprepared in a national park and get lost, etc.

The ABS stats have a separate group for walking (for fitness) which I have not included in my summary. The validity of the data depends on whether people going for a walk in a park after lunch consider this a bushwalk or walking for fitness.

This data is flawed in my opinion - it depends where and how it was gathered.... If it is only collected from clubs it is biased as it will not show true ages of all who bushwalk. It may lead to some huge errors in your conclusions if it is relied on too heavily.