Do "cool" route names cause crowding?

[longri]

Agree with your behavior analysis, well described thankyou. Thus your suspicions of refraining from cool naming are probably wise. Same glorying name recognition behavior likely has to do with why so many people climb famous peaks like Half Dome, Mount Ranier, and Everest...

Some people do climb those peaks for name recognition but the flaw in your logic is that the name itself is the important part. It's not. It only becomes significant when attached to a perceived high value destination.

[longri]

I think we should have an HST meet up at Lost Lake (or Long Lake or Blue Lake or ....) but not specify which lake and not allow communication prior to the meet up and then see where people end up.

Great idea, LOL :-)

[AlmostThere]

The place gets the perceived high value because of the marketing it gets, but I would submit that Half Dome gets a ton more visitors because it is given a huge stamp of uniqueness -- everyone thinks it's the only dome worth visiting because everyone else does. Like Whitney is the highest peak, or Everest. People are literally dying to do the unique thing. The irony being it's the least unique thing out there. Yay, I did something 50,000 other people did this year!

It's also not named Grueling Hike That Will Destroy Your Feet Dome. Or Devil's Dome, or Tourist Trap With 400 People Taking Selfies, or Bring your Gloves Dome. Dehydration Dome would be the most apt description from what I've seen. The name is part of the marketing.

[longri]

Marketing? I think people are attracted to climbing the tallest or hardest or coolest things. You might view those motivations as ignoble but it's very common, probably in our genes. My point is that the name is secondary to the destination. Half Dome is already a fairly pedestrian name. Giving it a less appealing name wouldn't affect the numbers attracted to it.

[Eiprahs]

I agree with keeping the name generic; simple accuracy is better. An author can describe the qualities in the text and give ratings of the route as desired.

Let me take the opportunity to promote WD's book. I have a copy and it is simply the most accurate and professionally produced backcountry guidebook that I have ever seen.

ditto Tom's entire comment

WD's book is excellent, the gold standard of beta.

A catchy name starts a spiral of fame/publicity/fame. . . .ala Roper's SHR. . . . so use/abuse is a concern. So maybe a suggested string(s) of described routes adding up to a through route without naming it a through route? Name the book chapter with the cool name, but leave the actual route to be assembled by the reader?

The topic of popularizing the wilderness has been long debated with no resolution. Once the guide book path is started, might as well finish it. Go WD!!


Baptiste Lake, Wind River Range:

[maiathebee]

I struggle with these thoughts too. The thing that keeps me going back and forth is density. On the one hand, if there are 100 people in an area and I want to be alone, I'd actually prefer that the people are concentrated along a popular trail rather than dispersed evenly throughout. If they're all on one trail, I can just avoid that area. If they are dispersed evenly throughout, I will likely have to camp near somebody. On the other hand if the people are all on one trail, then that one trail gets trashed.

I think cool route names are fun, but they don't make me want to do a trip any more or less---I'm much more interested in what the route has to offer. I spend a lot of time considering where to go, when to go, and where to make camp based on things like morning vs afternoon sun, will the thing I most want to look at be backlit at the time of day when I'm there, will the sunrise or sunset be better from where I'm camped, will I get sunshine in my camp early (yes please!!) to warm me up in the morning, etc etc. I think that seasoned backpackers are probably similar to me, but that newbies are very checkbox oriented, so the names appeal to them more.

Another thing that we're conflating a bit here is the historical trail names vs modern guidebook names. The JMT and the HST are both historical, official trail names shown on maps, while the Circle of Solitude is just a name a guidebook author (Mike White) made up. I don't think that many people know what the Circle of Solitude is. I do think a lot of people know what the JMT is.

I think that the huge spike in the JMT interest is tied to that book come movie Wild by Cheryl Strayed. The movie grossed $38M at the box office in 2015. That's about 5 million viewings. The book reached the #1 spot on the NYT best seller list in 2012 and was part of Oprah's book club. People research the PCT and realize it's really way too much, but they find the JMT is part of it and arguably the prettiest part and so they opt for that.

I do love weird historical place names, though, but I think that's a different category than what we're really talking about here. I just love thinking about how names evolved and how many of them are so literal. I love to imagine early Sierra explorers saying things like "Yes, it's over there by that big wet meadow. You know, the one near that thing that looks like a whale's back."

In the end, I think education is the biggest issue. I think a lot of people don't know why some LNT practices exist, but if they were better informed about why, they might be more likely to follow them. For example, washing dishes directly in a water source seems really natural if you don't think about it too much. This is the biggest mistake that I see inexperienced backpackers make. I think that instead of reading you the rules of the wilderness to get a permit, you should have to take a quiz on LNT. Then any wrong answers should be explained in detail. Frequent permit-getters could get something like a license so that they don't have to do the quiz all the time.

[giantbrookie]

I think the culture of today is for some folks to gravitate toward pre-planned routes and if the route name is interesting it may add another level of enticement. A small number of us like planning our own routes, but far more folks nowadays aim for one that is already written up. I am not so sure how much the snazzy name attracts folks so much as a pre-planned, well-publicized route does. The Sierra High Route is the best example.

I suppose this is one reason I am not too bummed about my backcountry fishing book failing to be published, even if at least one route has persisted by word and mouth all these years (the "Lunker Loop"). One thing is for sure, the "title track" wouldn't attract anybody nowadays because all the lakes are fishless now ("The Land of the Giant Brookies").

[rlown]

Publish your book as an historical piece. Most TR's and books are temporal anyway. Could even go with print on demand.

Off topic, but I have a really cool book from 1896 on the Civil war. It's interesting because the author had no Idea was was coming next.

[Wandering Daisy]

When I first moved to the Sierra, I researched guidebooks and did a lot of "pre-planned" routes. It does help when you move to an entirely new area. But after a year, I just figured out my own routes. I have a library of guidebooks and I still refer to a lot. To me they are jumping off ideas for my own.

I started mountaineering in the days before most guidebooks were written. I was a member of a climbing club and a lot of climbers in those days learned by going with others who had done the routes. Word or mouth has always been a source of routes, well before the internet. I believe that the surge in backpackers in the 1970's was more than we are seeing now, relative to the population. I remember when Fred Becky's guide came out for the North Cascades. I was absolutely thrilled! Climbers use guidebooks a lot, so when I backed off to just backpacking, it was just natural for me to also buy and read all the guidebooks.

Since I grew up with a climbing club, it does dismay me that young people today do not have that same opportunity. As a 16-year old I was well versed in being safe and being environmentally sound. Not named "leave no trace", we neverthness learned good environmental practices. Our bible was "Mountaineering Freedom of the HIlls". I did most of my early trips with 60-year old mountaineers who were willing to shepherd a new generation of climbers. I really appreciated that. Plus, my parents would not allow me to go with kids my own age, without adult supervision.

Last summer I did four trips, and on all, I rarely ran into anyone at all, once off the main trails. There still are plenty of places for solitude. I often go 5-8 days without seeing a single person. I did 3-4 trips in the Wind Rivers each year, for three years after I put out my guide, and honestly there was very little difference in use, other than the new "high routes" that are out on the internet with GPS tracks.

As I read our trip reports here on the forum, I also find that a lot of people follow someone else's route rather than figure out their own. By the way, our meet-up this summer is pretty obscure. I hope to make it, this time before everyone else leaves! I doubt it will become a popular route.