British Mountaineering Council
Analysis of Results of Outdoor Survey 2015-16
November 2016
i
Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Methodology 1
1.3 Limitations of the methodology 2
2. Survey findings 3
2.1 The ‘Total population’ 3
2.2 Representativeness of the sample 4
2.3 Memberships 4
2.4 Activities undertaken 5
2.5 Locations visited 8
2.6 Distances walked and time taken 13
2.7 Weather during visit 14
2.8 Frequency of visit 15
2.9 How decision was made to visit 17
2.10 Distances travelled to area visited 19
2.11 People involved in the visit 22
3. Spending 26
3.1 Introduction 26
3.2 Accommodation 26
3.3 Spending over the weekend 27
3.4 Spending over the previous 12 months 34
3.5 Extrapolation of annual spend 35
List of Tables and Figures Table 2.1: Percentage of the Welsh population taking part in activities relevant to BMC 3 Figure 2.1: Membership of clubs 5 Figure 2.2: Participation in main activities by number 6 Figure 2.3: Participation in main activities by percentage 6 Table 2.2: Levels of multiple participation (%) 7 Table 2.3: Other destinations mentioned 5 or more times by respondents 10 Table 2.4: Other destinations mentioned 5 or more times by climbers 12 Figure 2.7: Distances walked (based on sub-sample of 200 responses) 13 Figure 2.8: Weather conditions in area visited 14 Figure 2.9: Weather conditions in area visited by listed activity 15 Figure 2.10: ‘Other’ weather conditions in area visited 15 Figure 2.11: Frequency of visits to the area in previous 12 months 16
ii
Figure 2.12: Frequency of visits to specific named areas in previous 12 months 16 Table 2.5: Areas with highest and lowest by category of visit frequency 17 Figure 2.13: How decision made to visit area, by type of main activity (%) 18 Figure 2.14: Characteristics of areas visited which influenced decision to visit 19 Figure 2.15: Total distances travelled to go walking/climbing (miles) 20 Figure 2.16: Total distances travelled to go walking/climbing, by activity 21 Figure 2.17: Modes of transport used 21 Figure 2.18: Distances travelled by different mode of transport 22 Figure 2.19: Nature of respondents’ companions 23 Figure 2.20: Nature of respondents’ companions by type of activity 23 Figure 2.21: Number of males/females in groups 24 Figure 2.22: Representation amongst stated age ranges in respondents’ groups 25 Figure 3.1: Type of accommodation used by respondents who stayed away 27 Figure 3.2: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (all categories) 28 Figure 3.3: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Parking) by type of activist 29 Figure 3.4: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Accommodation) by type of activist 30 Figure 3.5: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Total travel) by type of activist 30 Figure 3.6: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and Drink bought outside
area visited) by type of activist 31 Figure 3.7: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and Drink bought in area
visited) by type of activist 31 Figure 3.8: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Clothing/equipment) by type of
activist 32 Figure 3.9: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Hiring charges) by type of activist 32 Figure 3.10: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Maps/guides) by type of activist 33 Table 3.1: Estimated average spending over a weekend (by respondent and his/her group) 33 Figure 3.11: Estimated spending by respondent in previous 12 months 35 Table 3.2: Estimates of total spend 35 Figure A2.1: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Parking) 41 Figure A2.2: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Accommodation) 41 Figure A2.3: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Total Travel) 42 Figure A2.4: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and drink) 42 Figure A2.5: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Clothing/equipment) 43 Figure A2.6: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Hire charges) 43 Figure A2.7: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Maps/guides) 44
Appendices Appendix 1 Questionnaire
Appendix 2 Spending by type of expenditure
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Between August 2015 and August 2016, the British Mountaineering Council (BMC) undertook
an on-line survey with the aim of it being completed by hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers.
The BMC is keen to understand the visitor patterns and experiences of climbers and hill
walkers, and their contribution to local services. The expectation is that the data will allow it to:
- Build a profile and evidence base of the types of visitor patterns at various locations;
- Understand the decision making process as to why some areas might be more popular
than others throughout the year;
- Explore trip characteristics such as transport use, accommodation and activities
undertaken;
- Build a picture of what hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers spend on average per visit to
hills, crags, cliffs and mountains.
This survey aims to provide up to date information so that the BMC can contribute more
directly to research and evidence relating to the impact of outdoor recreation. This will help
build a more compelling case to Government of the real value of outdoor recreation, specifically
climbing and hill walking.
1.2 Methodology
The survey was conducted using Survey Monkey on a monthly basis for the 13 months starting
in August 2015 and ending in August 2016. During this period, anyone wishing to complete the
survey was able to access it via the BMC website. To take part, respondents were asked to
complete a questionnaire, which is included in Appendix 1.
The questionnaire was designed to allow completion within a target time of 5 minutes. As a
result, many questions were multiple choice, with respondents selecting from a pre-set list of
options. The intention was to gather data relevant to the respondent’s activities on the weekend
prior to them completing the survey, plus some questions about their annual spending and their
club membership(s).
There were no restrictions on the number of times that a respondent could complete the
questionnaire, nor was the survey limited to BMC members only. The on-line survey remained
available throughout the first or last week of the month, although the dates of the ‘previous
weekend’ probably differ for different respondents.
For the analysis, the results for the year from September 2015 to August 2016 were downloaded
and collated into a single excel file. This provided 4,198 separate records which were analysed
as a single dataset, with limited cross-tabulations due to the reducing confidence in results that
arise when sub-samples get smaller. Details of the key findings are included in the subsequent
sections of the report, below.
2
1.3 Limitations of the methodology
There are some limitations to the method used that should be taken into account when viewing
the results:
- To take part in the survey, an individual respondent needs to be aware of the survey and
have access to the internet. It is not possible to state the level of awareness of the survey
amongst the target audience but it is likely that it is the more active individuals and
BMC members who were aware of the survey, and not the casual/occasional visitor to
the hills, cliffs, crags and mountains of UK and further afield. However, the Office for
National Statistics stated1 that, in 2013, 83% of households in the UK had access to the
internet, suggesting this is a lesser limitation.
- BMC covers England and Wales and it is likely that most of the respondents are from
these two countries. If so, this means that hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers from
Scotland and Northern Ireland are probably under-represented in the sample.
- Using the email address provided by most respondents (3,581; 85% of all responses) as
a unique identifier, it can be seen that some completed the survey every month, whereas
others did so only once. This again could introduce a bias towards the keener
respondents who completed the survey more often and may have a different activity
profile from the less keen.
- Some of the responses allowed for responses that are implausible or, in theory at least,
mutually exclusive (for example, responses to the questions about spending should elicit
only one answer – say £6-£10 – but in practice some provided several responses to this
question).
- A number of the answers are self-defining. So, for example, the responses to questions
about the weather conditions may be answered differently depending on the individual’s
perceptions, possibly shaped by their experience.
As a consequence, the sample of hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers contained in the survey
results are not necessarily representative of BMC members as a whole, nor of the total
population of hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers in England and Wales or, indeed, the UK
as a whole. The representativeness of the sample is discussed further in the next chapter.
1 See:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/householdcharacteristics/homeinternetandsocial
mediausage/bulletins/internetaccesshouseholdsandindividuals/2013-08-08 (visited 12th September 2016)
3
2. Survey findings
2.1 The ‘Total population’
The total population for the purposes of this survey is all those engaged in outdoor activities of
direct interest/relevance to the BMC, namely, hillwalking, rock climbing and mountaineering.
Of course, these can be sub-divided into various forms and the survey focuses on:
- Traditional (aka ‘Trad’) climbing;
- Sport (aka ‘bolted’) climbing;
- Bouldering;
- Scrambling;
- Hillwalking (sub-divided into walks of under or over 2 hours).
The Active People Survey2, conducted by Sport England, showed that in the year from April
2015 to March 2016, an estimated 280,200 individuals of 16 years of age and above resident in
England took part in mountaineering activities3 at least once in the 28 days prior to the survey
interview. Within this subset, 32,600 individuals took part in mountaineering activities at least
once a week. If the demographic is extended to those of 14 years of age or older, the numbers
reported in the Active People Survey taking part rise to 301,300 and 42,600 respectively.
The most recent data for Wales is from the Active Adults Survey4 (which is a survey of Welsh
residents of 15 years of age and above). The results are presented in the form of the percentage
of the sample who had taken part in particular activities in the previous 28 days. Data are split
between male and female, and provided for the sample as a whole. The results are provided in
Table 2.1 below, expressed as a percentage of the population.
Table 2.1: Percentage of the Welsh population taking part in activities relevant to BMC
Activity All Males Female
Climbing 0.6 0.8 -
Mountaineering//Rock Climbing 1.1 1.6 0.6
Walking (more than 2 hours) 41.7 40.2 43.2
Climbing and Mountaineering/Rock Climbing 1.5 2.0 0.9
2 See documents available on: https://www.sportengland.org/research/who-plays-sport/by-sport/ (visited
12th
September 2016)
3 The survey defines ‘mountaineering’ as: climbing indoors, climbing rock, mountaineering,
mountaineering high altitude, hill trekking, hill walking, mountain walking and bouldering. Note that it
excludes ice climbing.
4 See: http://sport.wales/research--policy/surveys-and-statistics/active-adults-survey.aspx (Visited 12
th
September 2016)
4
The categories used in the Welsh survey appear to overlap (e.g. ‘Climbing’ and
‘Mountaineering/Rock Climbing’). Perhaps the most relevant is the last category listed –
‘Climbing and Mountaineering/Rock Climbing’, although this may not include easier hill walks.
According to the UK Population website5, the current population of Wales is 3.06 million.
Assuming the same percentage of the population take part in mountain related activities now as
did so in 2012, then the total population of individuals of relevance to the survey is around
45,900 (1.5% of 3.06m).
Combining the results from the two surveys, it seems that the total number of people (aged mid-
teen or older) living in England and Wales engaged in activities of relevance to the BMC at
least monthly is about 350,000 or more (due to the failure of the Welsh sample to include
hillwalking).
Obviously, not all these people will be members of the BMC. Recent estimates suggest that the
total membership of the BMC is over 81,0006 as of March 2015 (up from around 62,000 in
20107).
2.2 Representativeness of the sample
Ideally, the sample should be selected at random and be as large as possible to increase
confidence levels. The ‘test’ of randomness is that any member of the target population should
have an equal chance of being included in the survey. As noted above, this is not the case.
Consequently, the sample is not totally representative. Nonetheless, it is possible to gain some
understanding of the portion of the total population represented.
Using the email address provided by 85% of respondents, it is possible to estimate the number
of individuals who have contributed to the survey. Of the 4,198 records, 3,581 (85%) had email
addresses. Of these 3,581, just under a half (44%, n=1,576) were unique. If it is assumed that
the same proportion applies to those respondents who did not provide an email address, then
these represent a further 271 individuals (4,198-3,576 x 44%). It can be estimated, therefore,
that the sample comprises responses from 1,847 individuals.
This, in turn, represents about 2% of the total BMC membership and about 0.5% of the total
potential target audience. The subject of membership was addressed at the end of the
questionnaire but is reported here as it has some relevance to representativeness.
2.3 Memberships
Respondents were asked whether they were members of the BMC and, in addition, what other
clubs. The Mountaineering Councils of Scotland (MCofS) and Ireland (MCofI) were given as an
option of ‘A Climbing’ and/or ‘A Walking’ club. More than one response was allowed, which is
appropriate given that many active hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers are members of several
clubs including both climbing and walking clubs. The responses are expressed graphically in
Figure 2.1 below.
5 See: http://ukpopulation2016.com/wales (Visited 12
th September 2016)
6 Personal communication.
7 Sports Structures (2010). Membership survey 2010. Final report for the BMC.
5
Figure 2.1: Membership of clubs
It was possible to provide further information about memberships but the responses are difficult
to analyse. However, a scan through the responses reveals that most of the leading clubs are
represented.
2.4 Activities undertaken
Respondents were asked what type of activity they had undertaken over the weekend in
question, with a prompt of six different categories of hill/mountain based activities and a catch
all ‘Other’ category which allowed respondents to state what other outdoor activities they had
undertaken. More than one response was allowed. Results for the six main activities are shown
in Figure 2.2 below. The figures are expressed as a percentage (see Figure 2.3). A total of
4,504 responses were received covering the six activities. Hillwalking for more than 2 hours
was by far the most common activity reported (n=1901, 42%). Trad climbing came in second,
with nearly a thousand respondents (n=964, 21%) having done this. The other activities had
similar levels of participation of around 400 (7%-11%).
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
BMC MCofS MCofI Another climbingclub
A walking club
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
re
spo
nse
Club/Type of club
6
Figure 2.2: Participation in main activities by number
Figure 2.3: Participation in main activities by percentage
A further analysis was done to show what range of activities people recorded. Table 2.2 shows,
for example, which of the remaining five listed activities were also done by those who said they
went Trad climbing. So, continuing the example of Trad climbers, 11% also went Sports
climbing, whereas 26% of Sports climbers also did Trad climbing.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000N
um
be
r p
arti
cip
atin
g in
act
ivit
y Main activities
Trad Climbing
Sports Climbing
Bouldering (presumablyoutdoors)
Scrambling
Hill walking (<2 hrs)
Hill walking (>2 hrs)
7
Table 2.2: Levels of multiple participation (%)
Activities Trad Sport Boulder Scramble HW <2 HW >2
Trad climbers who also went: 11% 10% 10% 7% 18%
Sports climbers who also went: 26% 13% 6% 9% 11%
Boulderers who also went: 23% 12% 5% 9% 10%
Scramblers who also went: 29% 7% 7% 12% 66%
Hill walkers (<2 hrs) who also went: 15% 8% 10% 8% 10%
Hill walkers (>2 hrs) who also went: 9% 2% 3% 11% 2%
Although there is considerable cross-over, hillwalkers out for more than 2hrs are least likely to
do any other activity, with scrambling the most commonly done (11%) compared to other
activities – between 2% and 9%. Looked at from the other aspect, around two-thirds of
scramblers also went walking for more than 2 hours, although they may be referring to the
walk-in (as may other multiple activity responses). Trad climbing seems to be the activity most
commonly undertaken as part of a multi-activity weekend.
As noted earlier, respondents could also list ‘Other outdoor activities’. This was an open
question and responses (n=863) came in many varied forms that defy easy analysis.
Consequently, responses have been grouped into related activities (e.g. water sports, airsports)
and results are shown in Figure 2.4. Non-physical activities and ‘Work’ have been excluded.
Running was by far the most commonly listed of the other activities (n=292). This term was
used to cover fell/mountain running, orienteering, trail running events). Low level walking
(including coastal, countryside, canal, dog and city walks) came a distant second (n=115).
Biking (road as well as mountain), ice/winter climbing and indoor climbing were roughly equal
additional activities.
Figure 2.4: Participation in other types of physical activity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Nu
mb
er
par
tici
pat
ing
in a
ctiv
ity
8
2.5 Locations visited
Respondents were next asked to state which area(s) they had visited over the weekend in
question. Eighteen popular mountain/climbing areas in Great Britain were listed, together with a
catch-all ‘Other’. The number of responses for each of the 18 listed areas is shown in Figure
2.5. Respondents were able to provide more than one response. The most commonly visited
areas were the Peak District (n=847), Lake District (n=576) and Snowdonia (n=469).
In addition to the 18 named areas, 980 respondents listed other areas. However, the question
imposed no restriction on answers, so analysing results is more difficult as spellings may differ
or the same destination referred to in different ways (for example “Skye” or “Isle of Skye”; or
“Alps”, “The Alps”, “Swiss Alps”, “French Alps” and “Italian Alps”). Where feasible, these
different references to the same destination have been combined, but not in all cases. Of these
980 responses, 505 relate to places mentioned 5 or more times. These destinations, and the
number of responses for each, are shown in Table 2.3.
There is clearly scope for misinterpretation in the way this ‘Other’ option is exercised and there
may be some overlap with some of the named destinations. That possibility aside, the popularity
of Dorset as a destination for respondents is clear (n=85) (making it the 11th most popular
destination amongst the named destinations). Taking the ‘Pennine’ destinations as a whole, this
too represents a relatively popular ‘Other’ destination (n=50).
9
Figure 2.5: Number of visits to the 18 listed areas
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Yorkshire Dales
Wye Valley/Cheddar
West Highlands
Southern Sandstone
Southern Highlands
South Downs
Snowdonia
Scottish Borders
Pembroke
Peak District
Northumberland
North York Moors
Lake District
Gower
Dartmoor
Cornwall
Cairngorms
Brecon Beacons
Numbers saying they had visited this area
10
Table 2.3: Other destinations mentioned 5 or more times by respondents
Destination
No. of mention
s Destination No. of
mentions
Alps 16 Malverns 5
Anglesey/Gogarth 18 Manchester 6
Berwyns 6 Mendips 8
Cannock Chase 6 Mountains of Mourne 12
Cheshire 17 New Forest 7
Chilterns 16 North Downs 6
Clwyd/Clwydian Hills 15 North West Highlands 22
Cotswolds 25 Northern Highlands 5
Derbyshire 7 Ochill Hills 6
Devon/N Devon 13 Pennines 11
Donegal 5 Pennines (North) 5
Dorset (Portland/Swanage) 85 Pennines (South) 19
Exeter 6 Pennines (West Moors) 15
Exmoor 7 Shropshire Hills 14
Fife 5 Skye 12
Fontainbleau 11 South Wales 5
Forest of Bowland 5 Spain 12
France 8 Staffordshire 9
Lancashire 18 Surrey Hills 6
Leicestershire 8 Wiltshire 6
London 8 Yorkshire 9
The range of areas visited by respondents has been broken down by type of listed activity
undertaken when at this destination. The results of this breakdown are shown in Figure 2.6.
Hill walking is the most common activity in all listed areas visited where there are hills to climb
(i.e. areas like Pembroke and Southern sandstone attracted no hill walkers). Likewise, areas with
few or no crages attracted no Trad climbers, Sports climbers or Boulderers (e.g. South Downs,
Brecon Beacons, Southern Highlands). In contrast, the most common areas visited catered for
all forms of listed activity. Many more visitors to the Lake District and Snowdonia went
hillwalking for more than 2 hours than went Trad climbing. In contrast, in the Peak District
numbers of Trad climbers fell short of hill walkers (>2hrs) by only a small margin.
11
Figure 2.6: Visits to the 18 listed and ‘other’ areas by main type of activity undertakem
0 100 200 300 400
Other
Yorkshire Dales
Wye Valley/Cheddar
West Highlands
Southern Sandstone
Southern Highlands
South Downs
Snowdonia
Scottish Borders
Pembroke
Peak District
Northumberland
North York Moors
Lake District
Gower
Dartmoor
Cornwall
Cairngorms
Brecon Beacons
Number stating they had visited this area
Trad
Sports
Boulder
Scramble
HW <2
HW >2
12
HW<2 = Hill walking for less than 2 hours; HW>2 = Hill walking for more than 2 hours
Respondents who went climbing were asked to say which crag(s) they had visited. Again,
complications in the analysis arose due to variations in spelling and/or descriptions (e.g. “Carreg
Wasted”, “Carreg Wastad” and “Wastad”) but this has been accommodated as far as is
reasonably possible. Results are given in Table 2.4 but only for those crags mentioned 5 or
more times. The popularity of the Peak District edges is evident from this analysis.
Table 2.4: Other destinations mentioned 5 or more times by climbers
Destination No. of
mentions Destination No. of
mentions
Almscliffe 10 Harpur Hill 5
Australia (slate) 5 Harrison's 11
Awesome walls 5 Higgar Tor 5
Baggy Point 5 Holyhead 6
Bamford 8 Horseshoe Quarry 10
Ben Nevis 9 Hound Tor 6
Birchens 12 Idwal 15
Black Rocks (Borrowdale) 5 Indoors 39
Blacknor 6 Kyloe 6
Bonehill 7 Lawrencefield 8
Bosigran 16 Llanberis 6
Boulder Ruckle 5 Malham 8
Bowden Doors 7 Milestone Buttress 6
Bowles 9 Millstone 8
Brimham 9 Portland 6
Buchaille Etive Mor 5 Ramshaw 5
Burbage 35 Roaches 26
Carrel Wastad 6 Sennen Cove 6
Castle Naze 8 Sheep's Tor 8
Cheddar Gorge 6 Shepherd's 11
Cheedale 10 St Govans 5
Coire an t'snaechda 13 Stanage 90
Cummingstone 5 Stoney Middleton 6
Curbar 15 Subliminal 7
Dancing Ledges 5 Symonds Yat 12
Dewerstone 9 The Cuttings 6
Dinas Cromlech 6 Tremadog 20
Dinorwic 7 Tryfan 12
Dow Crag 5 Wildcat 7
Froggatt 7 Windgather 6
Giggleswick 5 Winspit 5
Gimmer 10 Wintour's Leap 9
Gogarth 12 Wyndcliffe 8
13
2.6 Distances walked and time taken
A question was then asked for information about distances travelled. No set responses were
offered and so some answered with distances walked in miles (or kilometres) and others
answered with a period of time. Some provided answers for several days’ walking. As a result,
it was practically impossible to sort the data using excel. Consequently, only the first 200
responses were looked at, and so results provided in the figure below (Figure 2.7) are expressed
as percentages but should be interpreted with care.
Figure 2.7: Distances walked (based on sub-sample of 200 responses)
Although the most commonly mentioned distances lay between 5 and 10 miles (a third of
responses), those saying they walked between 10 and 15 miles were almost as numerous (29%),
and nearly a quarter (23%) walked even further.
0 to 5 miles 14%
5-10 miles 34% 10-15 miles
29%
15 miles or more 23%
14
2.7 Weather during visit
Respondents were then asked to describe the weather where they were climbing/hill walking,
selecting from a list of six options, plus an opportunity to add to this using an ‘Other’ field.
Clearly, there is scope for subjectivity in the response, as one respondent’s breeze may be
another respondent’s windy. Further, as is often noted by safety guidance, weather conditions
can change rapidly in the mountains. Hence, respondents were able to give more than one
response. The responses given are shown in Figure 2.8. ‘Sunny’ and ‘Cloudy’ between them
account for over half of the weather conditions quoted by respondents.
Figure 2.8: Weather conditions in area visited
Of course, there may be some feedback loop involved with some activities; for example, a
decision to go Trad climbing may be predicated on an expectation of dry rock and so a bias
towards doing this in the absence of showers. In contrast, hill walkers may be less sensitive to
such conditions. Figure 2.9 gives a breakdown of conditions encountered during the visit by
type of listed activity. This analysis shows that, indeed, a higher proportion of Trad climbers
encountered sunny conditions and least wind at the area they visited relative to the other
activities, with hill walkers out for more than 2 hours enjoying the lowest level of sunniness and
the highest windiness.
A wide range of responses were given as ‘Other’. Figure 2.10 shows the four most often
mentioned ‘Other’ types of weather. Mistiness and variants of this were the most commonly
mentioned. Other common themes were:
- Flood/flooding;
- Hot/warm;
- Cloud inversions;
- Sleet;
- Light rain.
Sunny
Cloudy
Showers
Heavy Rain
Snowing
Windy
Other
15
Figure 2.9: Weather conditions in area visited by listed activity
Figure 2.10: ‘Other’ weather conditions in area visited
2.8 Frequency of visit
The next question posed to respondents was “In the past 12 months, how often have you visited
the area?” A number of set responses were available and the frequency with which these
answers were selected is shown in Figure 2.11. The most common response was “Several times
each year” (42%, n=1,546).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
HW >2
HW <2
Scramble
Boulder
Sport
Trad
Conditions encountered (%)
Sunny
Cloudy
Showers
Heavy Rain
Snowing
Windy
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
re
spo
nse
16
Figure 2.11: Frequency of visits to the area in previous 12 months
If broken down by the area itself (using the 18 suggested destinations), the results differ by
destination. Figure 2.12 shows visit frequency by different area visited.
Figure 2.12: Frequency of visits to specific named areas in previous 12 months
Daily 4%
First time 27%
Monthly 18%
Several times/yr
42%
Weekly 9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yorkshire Dales
West Highlands
Southern Highlands
Snowdonia
Pembroke
NY Moors
Lakes
Dartmoor
Cairngorms
First time
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Several times/yr
17
The table below (Table 2.5) shows the areas with the areas with the highest and lowest visit
frequencies (when expressed in percentage terms) – the weight of shading increases with visit
frequency.
Table 2.5: Areas with highest and lowest by category of visit frequency
Frequency Highest Lowest
Area % of those visiting the area
Area % of those visiting the area
First time Pembroke
Cornwall
West Highlands
44
41
40
Peak District
Snowdonia
Lake District
14
17
18
Daily Dartmoor
Scottish Borders
Cornwall
8
6
5
Wye Valley
West Highlands
Southern Sandstone
Pembroke
0
0
0
0
Weekly Peak District
South Downs
Gower
25
22
19
West Highlands
Southern Sandstone
Southern Highlands
2
4
4
Monthly Southern Sandstone
Dartmoor
Scottish Borders
33
24
22
West Highlands
Pembroke
Southern Highlands
8
10
11
Several times per year
Southern Highlands
West Highlands
Snowdonia
53
51
51
South Downs
Gower
Cornwall
30
31
31
Perhaps not surprisingly, the three most popular locations (Peaks, Lakes and Snowdonia) have
the lowest percentages of first time visitors, whereas those areas with high frequency first time
visitors tend to be areas that have relatively low numbers of visitors. Daily visits are usually a
very small percentage of the visitors, with Dartmoor getting the highest proportion. Destinations
in Scotland tend to have few frequent visitors but feature more prominently in the less frequent
categories (e.g. over half of the visitors to the Southern and West Highlands do so ‘several times
per year’).
2.9 How decision was made to visit
The next question sought to explore to what sources of information respondents turned when
choosing the area they visited that weekend or reasons influencing their decision. A variety of
set answers were available, with a catch-all response of ‘Other’. Respondents could give more
than one response but there was no scope within the questionnaire to link individual source/
reason with individual activity. The responses were analysed by type of main activity (i.e. the 6
main types of activity offered for selection in Question 1) and are shown (in percentage terms)
in Figure 2.13.
18
Figure 2.13: How decision made to visit area, by type of main activity (%)
It seems from this analysis that a high proportion of Hillwalkers who walk for more than 2
hours seek out information and from a wide range of sources, maps being the most commonly
quoted source and guidebooks the least frequently mentioned. Trad climbers are also more
likely to draw on sources of information but for them guidebooks are a key source, with weather
a key factor in their decision (see also Section 2.5 above).
In comparison, Sports climbers, Boulderers, Scramblers and Hillwalkers who walk for less than
2 hrs use relatively few sources of information to inform their decision on choice of destination.
Within this reduced level of consultation, key sources varied between groups – for example,
Sports climbers and Boulderers used friends and guidebooks, whereas Scramblers used maps
and newspapers/magazine; Hillwalkers under 2 hrs relied most frequently on ‘Other’ sources.
Amongst the whole sample, common themes for ‘Other’ sources were (in no particular order of
priority):
- Live/work nearby
- Family/friends live nearby
- Specific features of interest (e.g. archaeological remains)
- Event/competition happening
- Accommodation available in the area
- Bagging a summit in a list
Another influence on the decision to visit a specific area will be the area’s characteristics.
Question 8 sought to find out what characteristics were significant and to what extent. As in
other questions, respondents were able to choose from a list of set responses, with the ability to
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Tradclimber
Sport Boulder Scramble HW <2 HW >2
Previous visit
Friends
Guide book
Maps
Newspaper/magazine
Website
Weather conditions
Part of organised group
Location of training course
Other
19
provide more than one answer and to provide further details under an ‘Other’ response. Figure
2.14 lists the number of responses provided for each of the set answers.
Figure 2.14: Characteristics of areas visited which influenced decision to visit
‘Scenery/setting’ and ‘Nature of terrain’ were the most frequently cited reasons, mentioned
around 2,200 times each. In contrast, ‘An event’ and ‘Good for groups’ were the least frequently
cited characteristics. The themes most commonly referred to in the ‘Other’ responses mirrored
those given in response to how a decision to visit was made.
Another source of information is the Regional Access Database (RAD). Created and managed
by the BMC, it provides up-to-date information about crags and the access situation. It would be
reasonable to suppose that many climbers would consult it prior to visiting a crag, especially if
it is one with which they are not familiar. A question was therefore asked (of climbers only)
whether they had used RAD. Of the respondents who went Trad, Sports of Boulder climbing
who gave an answer, over four fifths said that they did not consult RAD.
It may be expected that BMC members would be more inclined to use RAD, and so the answer
to this question from BMC members only were counted. Perversely, perhaps, an even lower
percentage (11%, n=301) of BMC members had consulted RAD than when the sub-sample of
respondents to this question is taken as a whole.
2.10 Distances travelled to area visited
Respondents were given a series of fixed mileage ranges and asked to select which best
described the distance they travelled to reach the area they visited that weekend and asked
“Approximately how far (total) did you travel to where you began your walk in/walk to go
climbing/hill walking?” It has to be assumed that the question was seeking to establish the
distance travelled in one direction, although this is not entirely unambiguous. Logic dictates that
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Nu
mb
er
givi
gn t
his
re
spo
nse
20
there should only be one response per respondent but, in practice, it was possible to offer more
than one response and some did so. In the analysis, no attempt has been made to eliminate any
responses.
Firstly, the total number of responses by distance range was obtained and the results are shown
in Figure 2.15. All categories of distance were listed with broadly equal frequency – between
12% (for 6-10 miles) and 16% (for distances of 0-5 miles). This differs quite markedly from
many other sets of survey data analysed by the author, in which the shorter distance categories
(e.g. 0-5 and 5-10 miles) dominate. For example, in a recent survey of national trail users8,
interviewees who had travelled less than 10 miles to the start of their day’s activities comprised
43% of the sample: those travelling over 200 miles comprised only 9% of the total. It could be
suggested that people engaged in a specialist activity (such as Trad or Sports climbing) are
obliged to travel to wherever there is scope to do that activity, whereas hillwalkers have a much
wider choice of destinations.
Figure 2.15: Total distances travelled to go walking/climbing (miles)
In order to explore this, distances travelled were disaggregated into responses from different
activities (the six named activities and ‘other’). The results are shown in Figure 2.16 below.
This reveals that Boulderers, Hillwalkers under 2 hours and ‘Other activities’ tend to travel
shorter distances than the other groups. Scramblers are at the other extreme and most of them
travel over 100 miles to reach their chosen destination.
8 TSE Research (2015). National Trails 2014 Visitor Survey. Final report for Natural England.
16%
12%
14%
15%
15%
15%
13%
0-5 6-10 11-25 26-50 51-100 101-200 Over 200
21
Figure 2.16: Total distances travelled to go walking/climbing, by activity
Linked to this question is the mode of transport used. Q10 asked what mode people had used to
reach their destination. As with other questions, respondents could choose from a prescribed list
and ‘Other’ and could give more than one response (which is not unreasonable, given that
several modes of transport might be used by some). Figure 2.17 provides an analysis of all
responses given and shows that ‘Car/van’ is the mode of choice for a vast majority of
respondents (84%, n=3,314). Of the rest, ‘On foot’ is the most commonly quoted.
Figure 2.17: Modes of transport used
A further analysis was performed on the responses to this question – a cross-tabulation between
mode of transport used and distance travelled. The results of this cross-tabluation are given in
Figure 2.18. Given the dominance of car/van use, it is to be expected that all distance categories
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Trad climbing
Sport climbing
Bouldering
Scrambling
Hillwalking under 2hrs
Hillwalking over 2hrs
Other activity
Dis
tan
ce t
rave
lled
(m
iles)
0-5
6-10
11-25
26-50
51-100
101-200
Over 200
Rail 3%
Bus or Coach
3%
Car or Van 84%
Motorbike 0%
Bicycle 1%
On foot 5%
Other 4%
22
are mentioned and the spread is fairly uniform across all categories. Also not surprisingly, those
who used ‘On foot’ and ‘Cycle’ tended to travel short distances only (mainly 0-5 miles). Rail
transport, although not used often, was mainly used for longer journeys (25 miles and above).
Amongst ‘Other’ modes, air flights featured fairly regularly so journeys of over 200 miles was
the most commonly quoted distance for this group.
Figure 2.18: Distances travelled by different mode of transport
2.11 People involved in the visit
Several questions were used to determine the demographics of the groups of which respondents
had been part. The first of these asked about who accompanied the respondent. Yet again, a list
of prescribed answers was provided, along with ‘Other’. Respondents could give more than one
response but this led to an anomaly amongst some responses, where respondents in some cases
simultaneously answered ‘No-one’ and then one of the other categories of companion; clearly
this is not logically consistent unless explained by the respondent answering for different days
during the weekend visit or regarding ‘you’ as being ‘your group’ (such as a husband and wife
team). In the analysis, every response has been included (apart from several which are clearly
suspect).
Figure 2.19 shows the responses for the whole sample. Respondents were most commonly
accompanied by an ‘Other adult’ (32%, n=1,553) with ‘Spouse/partner’ almost as common
(28%, n=1,336). Children did not feature very commonly: 5% (n=232) of respondents were
accompanied by their own children and 3% (n=128) by other people’s children. Not many (4%,
n=184) were accompanied by members of an organised group.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rail
Bus/Coach
Car/Van
Motorbike
Cycle
On foot
Other
Mo
de
of
tran
spro
t
0-5 miles
6-10 miles
11-25 miles
26-50 miles
51-100 miles
101-200 miles
Over 200 miles
No answer
23
Figure 2.19: Nature of respondents’ companions
The same responses were disaggregated by type of activity, differentiating between the 6 named
activities and ‘Other activities’. The results of the analysis are shown in Figure 2.20 below.
Figure 2.20: Nature of respondents’ companions by type of activity
They show some patterns that are perhaps not unexpected. Trad and Sports climbers tend not to
climb solo but with an ‘Other adult’ and not their children (or anyone else’s). Trad climbers are
less inclined to climb with their ‘Spouse/partner’ than Sports climbers. Hillwalkers and
Nobody 12%
Spouse/partner 28%
Your own children
5%
Other adult 32%
Other children 3%
Members of club/association
10%
Part of organised group
4% Other
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Trad
Sport
Boulder
Scramble
HW <2 hrs
HW > 2 hrs
Nobody
Spouse/partner
Your own children
Other adult
Other children
Members of club/association
Part of organised group
Other
24
Scramblers are more likely to go out on their own and, if a short hillwalk, to be accompanied by
their spouse/partner. Although not a major form of company, Trad climbers, Scramblers and
Hillwalkers walking for over 2 hrs are more likely to do so as member of a club/association than
other activists.
Another question enables the gender split to be established and linked to group size, although in
some cases the answer defied quantification (e.g. in response to question of group size, some
said ‘Loads’ or ‘Lots’) and so had to be excluded. From the respondents who provided the
required information, they were part of groups that collectively comprised nearly 18,500
individuals, split 62.5% male and 37.5% female. Figure 2.21 shows the spread of gender by
group size. So, for example, over 300 respondent groups contained no females, whereas only 64
groups were female only.
Figure 2.21: Number of males/females in groups
A further question asked about the age distribution of the group, namely “Including you, which
of these age groups did the people in your group contain”. More than one response was possible
but the answers did not allow numbers within each age range to be recorded; all that can be
inferred from the response is that there was at least one member of the group who fell into the
age range mentioned. The results are shown in Figure 2.22.
People aged between 26 and 55 were most likely to be found in the respondents’ groups, each
accounting for about 20% of the responses. The younger (0 to 15 years of age) and older (66
and above) groups were least well-represented – 8% and 6% respectively.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
-15
16
-20
21
-30
Ove
r 3
0
Nu
mb
er
of
gro
up
s w
ith
sta
ted
nu
mb
er
of
ind
ivid
ual
s
Number in group
Female
Male
25
Figure 2.22: Representation amongst stated age ranges in respondents’ groups
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0-10 11-15 16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 >66
Pe
rce
nta
ge o
f gr
ou
ps
con
tain
ing
som
eo
ne
of
that
age
Age range (years)
26
3. Spending
3.1 Introduction
An important characteristic of behaviour of hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers is their
propensity to spend money in the areas visited, thus benefitting local businesses and helping
maintain services of value to visitors and locals alike. Consequently, a number of questions
were asked that relate to spending – both during the weekend that is the main subject of the
questionnaire and estimates for a 12-month period. Because of the importance of this series of
questions, it is made subject of this separate section.
3.2 Accommodation
For those who stayed away overnight in the area visited, respondents were asked to indicate the
main type of accommodation they used. A list of options was provided, together with an option
for ‘Other’. As with most of the other questions, respondents could give more than one response
and so this would allow someone to report that they camped one night and then stayed in a B&B
the next. All answers have been included in the analysis, including two that seem to be not
realistic.
Although the question specified that only those staying away should answer the question, ‘Did
not stay away’ was given as one of the options and this aswer was given by nearly half of the
respondents (48%, n=1,820). The other 52% of responses are shown in Figure 3.1. As can be
seen, a range of accommodation types were used, with ‘Camping on a site’ being the most
common response (19%, n=384). Other forms of rented accommodation (Hotels etc.; B&B etc.;
Bunkhouse; Youth Hostel; and Rented self-catering but excluding club huts) collectively
accounted for 13% of nights away. Mountaineering huts accounted for only 9% of nights away
(n=176). What might be considered the extremes of overnight accommodation – wild
camping/bivvy and second home – accounted for 8% and 2% respectively.
27
Figure 3.1: Type of accommodation used by respondents who stayed away
3.3 Spending over the weekend
The survey asked respondents what they/their group spent over the weekend and a range of
values provided to facilitate answering. It is possible that some respondents answered on the
basis of their own spending, whereas others attempted an assessment for their group. It is likely
that as group size increases, the response will relate more towards individual rather than group
spending. As with other questions, more than one response was possible, meaning that some
inconsistencies were evident in some responses (i.e. someone cannot claim that they spent both
between £0-£5 and £25-£50 over the same weekend – it has to be one or the other).
The question about spending was actually broken down into a variety of types of spending and
the answers have been analysed by type. Figure 3.2 shows the responses combined.
7% 4%
8%
8%
6%
9%
19%
8%
6%
11%
2% 12%
Hotel/Inn B&B/Farmhouse/Guesthouse
Rented self-catering Caravan/Campervan
Bunkhouse Mountaineering club hut
Camping on a site Wild camp/bivvy
Youth Hostel Friends/Family
Second home Other
28
Figure 3.2: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (all categories)
In Appendix 2, the different types of spending are shown individually in a series of graphs
(Figures A2.1 to A2.7).
Figure A2.1 shows information about spending on Parking. The majority of respondents spent
nothing (n=2,696) with £0-£5 being the most common response amongst those who had actually
incurred a cost. The numbers spending more than this declined rapidly.
Figure A2.2 shows information about spending on Accommodation. The majority of
respondents spent nothing (n=2,509). However, when accommodation has to be paid for, it
tends to have a high unit cost and the most commonly quoted range is £21-£50, although this
was not a particularly pronounced peak.
Figure A2.3 shows information about spending on Total travel. The pattern of spend differs
markedly from Parking and Accommodation, as the answers were spread much more uniformly.
Just under 300 respondents said they spent nothing. The most commonly quoted range was £21-
£50 but its ‘lead’ over other categories was not high, with £0-£5; £6-£10 and £11-£20 gathering
almost as many responses. Beyond £50, numbers declined rapidly but a small number (n=75)
spent over £300.
Figure A2.4 shows information about spending on Food and drink. Respondents were asked to
make a distinction between spending within the area visited and spending outside the area and
taken into it. In both cases, the majority of respondents spent nothing. However, differences
emerge between those who did spend money on food and drink. Those spending outside the area
tended to spend relatively small sums (the numbers answering £0-£5 and £6-£10 were both
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000N
um
be
r gi
vin
g th
is a
nsw
er
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Accommodation
Parking
Total Travel
Food/Drink taken
Food/Drink bought in areavisited
Clothing/equipment
Hire charges
Maps/guides
29
greater for the spending outside the area); in contrast, the numbers spending higher sums (above
£11) were greater within the area visited than outside.
Figure A2.5 shows information about spending on Clothing/equipment. Overall, the vast
majority spent nothing on clothing/equipment. Spending is thus restricted to relatively few
individuals, although when spending did occur, it can be fairly high (the most commonly cited
amount was £101-£200).
Figure A2.6 shows information about spending on Hire charges (e.g. guide or training
instructor). Overall, the vast majority spent nothing on hire charges. Spending is thus restricted
to relatively few individuals (n=72) and spending is spread across all the ranges, with a skew
towards the lower levels.
Figure A2.7 shows information about spending on Maps/guides). Spending follows the same
pattern as the previous two categories – with very few people spending money on these items
(14%, n=497). When spending did occur, it tended to be below £50.
A wide array of responses was given under the ‘Other’ category, including items such as race
entry fees, donations and souvenirs (e.g. a picture, a rare book).
In order to explore the patterns further, spending was disaggregated by type of main activity to
see if there were any apparent differences. As before, spending was split by category. Figures
3.3 to 3.10 show each category of spending but split between Trad climbers; Sports climbers;
Boulderers; Scramblers; Hillwalkers (< 2hrs); and Hillwalkers (> 2hrs). Commentary relates to
the differences in spending between types of activist rather than absolute levels. In order to
facilitate comparisons, figures are expressed as a percentage of the sub-sample giving this
response; however, it should be noted that the number of responses varies so the level of
confidence of the findings will vary.
Figure 3.3: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Parking) by type of activist
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
30
With reference to Figure 3.3, there seems to be little difference in spending on Parking between
different types of activist.
Figure 3.4: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Accommodation) by type of
activist
With reference to Figure 3.4, the general pattern is similar for all types of activist apart from
Scramblers, who seem to be reluctant to spend between £21-£50 on accommodation. This may
be simply a function of this dataset as there does not seem to be any logical explanation for this
anomaly.
Figure 3.5: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Total travel) by type of activist
Figure 3.5 relates to spending on Total travel and this shows a much wider variety of spending
between activists. There are two peaks of spending reported, with Hillwalkers (under 2 hours);
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
31
Boulderers and Sports climbers clustering around a low peak of £0-£5, and Scramblers, Trad
climbers and Hillwalkers (over 2 hours) clustering around a higher peak of £21-£50. Of the six
main activities considered, Sports climbers have the most uniform spread of spending on Total
travel.
Figure 3.6: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and Drink bought outside
area visited) by type of activist
With reference to Figure 3.6, there seems to be little difference in spending on Food and drink
bought outside the area visited between different types of activist.
Figure 3.7: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and Drink bought in area
visited) by type of activist
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
32
Insofar as spending within the area visited is concerned (Figure 3.7), there also seems to be
little difference in spending on Food and drink bought in the area visited between different types
of activist, although Scramblers have a greater frequency of paying £21-£50.
Figure 3.8: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Clothing/equipment) by type of
activist
With reference to Figure 3.8, there seems to be little differnce in spending on
Clothing/equiipment between different types of activist.
Figure 3.9: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Hiring charges) by type of
activist
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Re
spo
nd
ets
sta
tin
g th
is le
vel o
f sp
en
d
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
33
Similarly, there seems to be little differnce in spending on Hiring charges between different
types of activist (see Figure 3.9).
Figure 3.10: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Maps/guides) by type of activist
And finally, with reference to Figure 3.10, there seems to be little difference in spending on
Maps/guides between different types of activist.
A further analysis can be performed to provide an estimate of the average spend over a weekend
by respondents and their companions. However, to perform this, it is helpful to take the mid-
point of each range as the amount spent (so, for example, the mid-point in the range £6-£10 is
taken as £7.5). The ‘Over £300’ presents some difficulty and, for the purpose of the analysis, a
figure of £400 is used for those who claim to have spent more than £300. The results of the
analyses is shown in Table 3.1. Given the use of the mid-point of the range, it would be sensible
to regard these figures as being within a confidence range of +/-50%.
It would be useful to have some sort of estimate of typical daily spend by a hillwalker /climber/
mountaineer. Arriving at a reliable estimate is made complicated because of the use of the
spending period as being a vaguely defined period (a weekend) and by lumping together
spending by individuals and groups. Further, mathematically, it is not entirely correct to make a
sum of the averages for different categories of spend, as they are based on different sub-
samples. However, casting aside these concerns (by summing the averages, dividing the amount
by two to adjust the figures to approximately a single day, and ignoring the individual-group
issues), the average amount spent by a hillwalker/climber/mounaineer was £60. However,
ignoring those who spent nothing at all, then, on the same basis the amount spent was around
three times as much - £180.
Table 3.1: Estimated average spending over a weekend (by respondent and his/her group)
Category of spending Total spend (£)
Average spend – all respondents (£)
Average spend of those spending something (£)
Parking 5,200 1.4 5.6
Accommodation 105,800 28.8 90.6
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts s
tati
ng
this
leve
l of
spe
nd
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Trad Climbers
Sports Climbers
Boulderers
Scramblers
Hill walkers (<2hrs)
Hill walkers (>2hrs)
34
Total Travel 150,600 40.0 43.1
Food/Drink taken 42,900 11.6 18.8
Food/Drink bought in area visited 78,200 21.4 33.9
Clothing/equipment 45,300 12.9 84.4
Hire charges 4,400 1.3 61.5
Maps/guides 10,200 2.9 20.5
Note – see comments in earlier comment about group spending estimates
It can be seen from the figures that, for example, the average spend on Hire charges is low
(£1.3/person) on average because many people do not incur such costs, but when they do, the
costs are much higher (£61.5/person). Another interesting feature is the similarity between
average spend on Total travel between everyone and those only who incurred such costs (£40.0
vs £43.1), which suggests that nearly everyone incurs travel costs.
Evidence from this initial survey suggest that each of the BMC’s 83,000 members could spend
in the order of £60 on each day of a weekend visit to go hillwalking, climbing or
mountaineering. This adds up to nearly £10m if each BMC member spent only one weekend
staying away per year. The actual annual spend by hillwalkers, climbers and mountaineers in the
UK is much higher than this because of multiple visits by BMC members and spending by
people who are not BMC members. It is hoped that subsequent surveys will be able to more
clearly demonstrate spending habits.
3.4 Spending over the previous 12 months
In addition to spending over the previous weekend, respondents were asked to estimate their
spending over the previous 12-months. However, if comparisons are made between multiple
responses by the same respondent (as identified by their email address), they tend to vary.
Nonetheless, the figures given are probably of the right ‘order of magnitude’ and so are of some
value.
As with other questions, respondents were asked to select from a pre-determined range of
spending. The number of responses received for each category is shown in graphic form in
Figure 3.11. Although a few respondents reported that they tended to spend less than £100
(with the exception of spending on food and accommodation, of which many – n=450 – spend
between £51 and £100), and a small number who spend more than £1,000 on each of the three
categories, the majority of respondents spend between £101 and £1,000 annually on each of the
three categories – Clothing/Equipment; Travel and Food/Accommodation. However, the
distribution within these categories varies with type of spending. The most common response
for spending on Clothing/Equipment is £501-£1,000, with a smaller peak at £201-£300. A
similar pattern emerged with respect to Travel. As regards annual spending on
Food/Accommodation, £101 to £200 is the most common response, with a lower peak at £501-
£1,000.
35
Figure 3.11: Estimated spending by respondent in previous 12 months
3.5 Extrapolation of annual spend
It is possible to use the data obtained in the survey and combine it with the estimates of the total
population of regular hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers and produce some broad brush
estimates of annual spend. However, the figures produced have to be issued with caution.
Firstly, as with weekend spending, it is helpful to take a mid-point of the range for use in
calculations. The upper range (which is without limit) has been taken to be £3,000. For this
question, no option was provided of ‘Nothing’. However, no replies were provided by 450 to
480 respondents (slight variation between categories) and it may be that these were people who
spend nothing but this seems unlikely – it is more likely to be the case that they chose not to
make an estimate. Consequently, the analysis ignores these non-responses.
Using the individual estimates as a base, and working with the estimated population of
hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers in England and Wales of 350,000 (see Section 2.2), total
annual spending by this sector can be estimated – albeit it with heavy caveats regarding
robustness (for example, it is likely to be an underestimate, as it excludes children under 16 in
England and 15 in Wales). The results are shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Estimates of total spend
Category Average individual spend (£) Total spend (£m)
Clothing and equipment 576.6 201.8
Total travel 509.0 178.1
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
re
spo
nse
Amount spent per year (£)
Clothing andequipment
Travel
Food andaccommodation
36
Food and accommodation 405.5 141.9
Total
521.9
It is difficult to gauge whether this figure is credible without some sort of comparison. Clothing
and equipment are, in reality, the only one of the three categories that is likely to have been
studied. A quick internet search brought to light a recent report by Pragma9. This is not an ideal
comparator as it covers the whole of the UK and the market examined will attract customers
from many segments of outdoor activity (e.g. leisure wear, sports etc.). Despite this, it does
provide some context. Pragma report that the total UK market size of the outdoor retail market
was of the order of £1.45bn in 2014. If the estimates arrived at using this survey’s data are
reasonably accurate, then hillwalkers/climbers/mountaineers account for about 14% of this
market.
9 Pragma (2015). Market Snapshot – UK Outdoor Retail 2015.
37
Appendix 1 Questionnaire 4 Pages
The BMC is conducting a survey of climbing and hill walking activity over the weekend of
…………. to try to understand the visitor patterns of climbers and hill walkers and their
contribution to local services. The survey should take less than 5 minutes to complete and will
help to demonstrate the recreational importance of our crags and hills across England and
Wales as well as the contribution visitors make to the local economy.
This survey will be repeated throughout the year so we can assess patterns across each month.
Keep an eye out for future surveys and increase your chances of winning more BMC goodies -
you can complete the survey each month.
1. What activity have you undertaken this weekend?
− Trad climbing
− Sport climbing
− Bouldering
− Scrambling
− Hill walking (under 2 hrs)
− Hill walking (over 2 hrs)
− Other (please specify)
2. Which area(s) did you visit this weekend?
− Brecon Beacons
− Cairngorms
− Cornwall
− Dartmoor
− Gower
− Lake District
− North York Moors
− Northumberland
− Peak District
− Pembrokeshire
− Scottish Borders
− Snowdonia
− South Downs
− Southern Highlands
− Southern Sandstone
− West Highlands
− Wye Valley / Cheddar / Avon Gorge
− Yorkshire Dales
− Other (please specify)
Question 3: If you went climbing, which crag (s) did you visit this weekend? If you were hill
walking, please go to question 4.
38
Question 4: If you went hill walking, where did you go and how far did you walk?
Question 5: What was the weather like where you were climbing / hill walking?
− Sunny
− Cloudy
− Showers
− Heavy Rain
− Snowing
− Windy
− Other (please specify)
Question 6: In the past 12 months, how often have you visited the area?
− Daily
− Weekly
− Monthly
− Several times a year
− First time this year
Question 7: How did you make the decision to visit the area / crag?
− A previous visit
− Friends/relatives/recommended
− Guide book
− Maps
− Newspaper/magazine article
− Website
− Weather conditions
− Part of an organised group or club
− Location of training course
− Other (please specify):
Question 8: What were the main characteristics of the area that made you want to visit? (Tick
one or more)
− Type of climbing (sport / trad / multi pitch etc.)
− Grade of climbing
− Nature of terrain
− Good for groups
− Scenery and / or setting
− Nature & Wildlife
− Accessibility
− Parking
− Peace and quiet
− A particular event (please specify)
− Weather
− Time of year
− Other (specify):
Question 9: Approximately how far (total) did you travel to where you began your walk in / walk
to go climbing / hill walking?
39
− 1 – 5 miles
− 6 -10 miles
− 11-25 miles
− 26-50 miles
− 51-100 miles
− 101-200 miles
− Over 200 miles
Question 10: What was the main method of transport used to travel over the weekend?
− Rail transport
− Bus or coach
− Car or van (own, friends, firms?)
− Motorcycle
− Bicycle
− On foot
− Other
Question 11: Who accompanied you over the weekend?
− Nobody
− Husband/wife/partner
− Children (under 16)
− Other adults in group
− Other children in group
− Members of club/association
− Part of organised group
− Other (please specify)
Question 12: Including you, which of these age groups did the people in your group contain?
− 0-10
− 11 - 15
− 16- 25
− 26 – 35
− 36 – 45
− 46 – 55
− 56 - 65
− 66 +
Question 13: How many in you group were:
− Male
− Female
Question 14: Please indicate roughly how much you spent on you or your group over the
weekend on the following?
− Accommodation
− Parking
− Total travel costs (to and from the destination, and during the trip)
− Food / drink bought in the local area to take with you during your activity
40
− Other food / drink bought in the local area (e.g. pub & restaurant / take-away / cafe etc.)
− Buying clothes or equipment
− Hiring equipment
− Maps, guides
Nothing / £0-£5 / £6-£10 / £11-£20 / £21-£50 / £51-£100 / £101-£200 / £201-£300 / £300+
− Other (please specify)
Question 15: If you stayed overnight in the area, please indicate the main type of
accommodation you used?
− Didn’t stay overnight
− Hotel / inn
− Bed and Breakfast/farm accommodation / Guesthouse
− Rented self-catering
− Caravan or camper van
− Bunk House
− Mountaineering club hut
− Wild Camping / bivvying / mountain bothy
− Youth Hostel
− Homes of friends or relatives
− Second home
− Other (please specify):
Question 16: Please estimate what you spent in the last year on:
− Outdoor clothing & equipment
− Travel costs (for climbing & hill walking trips in the UK)
− Food / accommodation (for climbing & hill walking trips in the UK)
£0-£50 / £51-£100 / £101-£200 / £201-£300 / £301-£400 / £401-£500 / £501-£1000 / £1001-
£2000 / £2000+
Question 17: Any other expenses relating to climbing and hill walking trips in the UK (please
specify)?
Question 18: Did you use the BMC Regional Access Database (RAD) before you left home or
during the weekend?
− Yes
− No
Question 19: Are you a member of the following?
− BMC
− MCofS
− Mountaineering Ireland
− Climbing Club (please give name of club in ‘other’)
− Hill walking club (please give name of club in ‘other’)
Question 20: Thanks for taking the time to complete the survey. What is your email address so
we can enter you into the prize draw?
41
Appendix 2 Spending by type of expenditure 4 Pages
Figure A2.1: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Parking)
Figure A2.2: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Accommodation)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Parking
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Nothing 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 300+
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Accommodation
42
Figure A2.3: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Total Travel)
Figure A2.4: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Food and drink)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Nothing 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200201-300 300+
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Total Travel
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Food/Drink taken
Food/Drink bought inarea visited
43
Figure A2.5: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Clothing/equipment)
Figure A2.6: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Hire charges)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Nothing 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 300+
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Clothing/equipment
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Nothing 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 300+
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Hire charges
44
Figure A2.7: Weekend spending by respondent and his/her group (Maps/guides)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Nothing 0-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 300+
Nu
mb
er
givi
ng
this
an
swe
r
Amount spent by you/your group during weekend (£)
Maps/guides
Top Related