Planning for a BPL Poll

> the food safety question is perhaps U.S.-centric.

Question 11 question is US centric? How? The question has multiple non-bear-canister options, which could be chosen by residents of bear-free countries. Bears are found in Russia, Canada, China, India, Norway, Denmark, etc. If the question didn't have a bear canister option, it would be considered "exclusionary" and a gross oversight.

However I don't dispute US bias for the entire survey: written in English, a lone American author, no international advisory panel, and question 13 in particular. So we'll let the United Nations write the following survey. At this point, however, 83% of the responses are coming from North America. (But not a single Mexican backpacker has responded!)

The question I'm kicking myself over, if you want to know, is Q6. It puts you in a bind if you tarp and bivy. Looks like people are choosing "tarp" in that instance, which would be correct, since the tarp is doing the primary work of shelter. And when I wrote "bivy," in my head, I meant "bivy alone." So it'll probably come out OK. But if I had it to do over again, I'd have put in a separate "tarp+bivy" response. I blame Max, whose recent post on "bivy alone" made a big impression on me.

Not a big deal, though. This survey was a quickie, for "kicks and giggles," as the PG version of the saying goes. If the community really gets into this, however, I might slow down and concentrate for the next one. I spent all of 15 minutes writing this one. Hey, nobody's paying me, so it had to be quick!

N = 73 at this point, wow! More data and faster than I was expecting.

Anybody want to guess what the average size backpack preferred by BPL respondents is?

I'm guessing heavier than expected, say 10 lbs.

Oops, I meant size in liters. Sorry.

(It was probably my euro-bias for liters, not cubic inches, that threw you off…)

"Europe is not a continent!"

Today I learned that besides the seven continents model, there are also four, five, and six continents models depending on where you live in the world;

I've also learned that Delmar is likely from Japan, Russia, Eastern Europe, or a Spanish Speaking Country since he does not recognize Europe (iiiiiitttt’ssss the final countdown);

I also learned that the Association of the National Olympic Committee only recognizes inhabited continents from the six continents model thus the five rings;

Apparently Pluto isn't a planet;

Neil Diamond writes creepy love songs to 9 y/os; and

with Google, all things are possible.

I can only imagine what I'll learn when the survey results are released.

Down bias too, no synthetic quilt choices, if I remember correctly…

Delmar —

When I started reading the posts in this thread, I thought, oh boy this is going to be a typical BPL disaster. But I am finding the initial results to be interesting. Looking forward to the final tally. Of course we can just enjoy it, or we can be anal statisticians and tear it a part. I'll be in the first camp — for the entertainment component.

Delmar, my comment wasn't intended to be snarky (and forgive me if it came across as so). I have no problem with the survey being US centric; after all, this is BPL, which is a US centric site and rightly so given its ownership and the majority of members. Rather, I was commenting on your surprise that sleeping with food was the main form of food safety. I guess that as well as food safety, we need to know what the food dangers are.
We have bears here in some parts of Turkey, but they come low down the risks of food dangers for most hikers. I recently spent a short time online looking to see if it's possible to find a bear canister sold outside of North America, but have so far drawn a blank.
I think your survey is fun and interesting and I enjoyed taking it.

That's funny you say that Nick, I also suspected it might be a train wreck, due to the notorious pickiness of the BPL crowd. And I am definitely getting some nit-picking, as would be appropriate to a professionally run and pre-tested survey, such as "Europe is not a continent" and "You didn't include a particular response option," etc. There is an inherent tension between my wanting an easy-to-report survey, and the general desire to have a survey that covers ALL the possible bases, and allows nuances such as multiple answers and the coding of open-ended questions–which requires a lot of analysis time, interpretation, and ideally, multiple raters–not happening.

On the other hand, the BPL community appears to be enthusiastically engaging with the survey, providing good information and adding insightful detail in the comments. With the BPL input, I'd be able to do a really good survey if I had it to do over again! In addition, many are passing along their well wishes and thanks. My favorite comment has been: "I love you Delmar, in a plutonic bromance sort of way." How can you beat that? Makes the whole survey worth the effort.

So far, the N = 97. Wow! I was thinking maybe 30 people would answer.

William: My bad, I understand your point now. My explanation points at sleeping with food were more a bit of a recruitment effort on my part, to get people interested in the results and hopefully participating. Sure, it makes complete sense to leave the bear canister at home if you have no bears.

To answer the previous question I posed, the average preferred backpack size is…well, a couple of respondents posted unrealistically small (0L) and large (2500L) sizes that really messed with the average, but if I trim them out (removing anyone who said <5L and >100L), the average preferred size backpack so far is 48L.

That's larger than I was expecting.

And the average summer base weight at this point is 13 lbs. Also more than I expected (happens to be mine, too!) Smallest I've seen in a quick scan is 5 lbs, listed by several people. Heaviest, 35, listed by two people.

I'm sorely tempted, because of the big response, to end the survey early and get the results out there. The proportions aren't changing much anymore, the data is looking stable, and once we have 100 responses, I really don't expect much to change. So with the slightest encouragement from you folks, I'd wrap it up at 100 responses, rather than wait a whole week.

What do you say?

Hi Delmar

Oh, I would give it the whole week. I am sure there will be the 'last minute scramble' from some, and they may (or may not) be slightly different from the 'early adopters' – so to speak.

Cheers

> unrealistically small (0L) and large (2500L) sizes
I can easily imagine 0 L being PREFERRED! Me too.

The 2500 L might actually be cubic inches, which translates to 41 L.

Cheers

I'm not surprised that the average pack is larger and heavier than the ideal UL pack. (Never mind that we have no rigorous definition of the ideal UL pack; it's clear that there is a fairly large contingent of vocal posters who have been around a long time who actually do go small & light). I can't be the only one here whose interest and participation in BPL is aspirational as well as practical. I haven't by any means finished my own journey towards ultralight yet (though recent back problems are likely to accelerate it!).

There's a reason you guys and gals haven't seen my full gear list yet to nitpick at! But it's much easier to answer a survey anonymously than it is to speak up in the forums and admit that you're still working on it.

This also accounts for the changes in BPL that I've seen the occasional grumble about. Y'all have been so successful proselytizing that you've drawn in a bunch of folks who want to go UL without being there yet.

Some day I hope to be part of that grumbling vocal minority ;)

I think it's an interesting survey, Delmar, and I happily participated. Looking forward to the tallied results.

"And I am definitely getting some nit-picking, as would be appropriate to a professionally run and pre-tested survey, such as "Europe is not a continent" and "You didn't include a particular response option," etc."

I would hope you'd know that some nit-picking is done in good humor with a smile, not a snarl. You do seem to have a sense of humor. Generally…..

"a couple of respondents posted unrealistically small (0L) and large (2500L) sizes that really messed with the average"

If you left something blank, would that automatically create a 0? I know I left a couple of number answers blank (average base weight being one of them since I don't weigh my stuff, packed or unpacked). Maybe that's where the 0 came from?

> Oh, I would give it the whole week. I am sure there will be the 'last minute scramble' from some…

OK Roger — a week it is.

> There's a reason you guys and gals haven't seen my full gear list yet to nitpick at! …

Yeah, kind of like asking: "Does this backpack make me look fat?" to a crowd of brutally honest boyfriends.

> If you left something blank, would that automatically create a 0?

Unanswered questions are coded as missing data, not as zero. Unanswered questions lower the N on a question-by-question basis, but in themselves, don't bias the results.

N = 111. Onward!

But I want the results NOW!….and yes I want fries with that too.

I wonder if the 35 lb base weight responses were based on a misunderstood definition of 'base-weight' as opposed to a 'full load out'? Or reported in kg instead of lbs?

Golly, if they were carrying a 35 Kg baseweight, that would be 77 pounds, yes?

I find the multiple reports of 5 lb base weight equally mind-bending.

So, we put our faith in means and medians, I suppose.

that was my thought too – one heavy pack – maybe a military person : )

Base Weight –

I assumed "skin out", minus food, water, and fuel.

What is your definition?

180 minutes away?!

I live within 10 minutes of three trailheads. Within 2 hours… infinite….!!!

Doh, brain fart. Disregard the kg to lb reference.

My understanding of 'base-weight' would be carried pack weight before/without food, water, and fuel.

Skin-Out weight would be all items carried including what is worn and carried before consumables, yes?

I was wondering though if the reported 35 lb weights were including consumables or a complete 'skin-out weight' due to a misconception of the terms.

A 35 lb base weight seems awfully heavy for anyone perusing this site for any length of time. Although, when I first discovered BPL my own base-weight was likely somewhere around this range. Really crazy when I think about it!

Size of pack does not equate with gear bulk – I never fill my pack.

I admit I may have skewed the average base weight figure: I thought beer was supposed to be included in the base weight.

>> I find the multiple reports of 5 lb base weight equally mind-bending.<<

I actually thought we'd see quite a few of the low base weights listed because you asked for "summer" base weight. I've always had a real envy of the folks that backpack in places where summer weather is reliable… I have never left my rain gear behind even on a weekend trip because our weather is so unreliable. Same goes for sleeping bag weight, my 32 F bag goes with me on all trips as does my down jacket… I envy those that can get away with sleeping under thermal sheet! My summer gear list is the same as my 3 season gear list.

I'm looking forward to seeing the results!

Good for you Max…