Pushed out by increases in user fees or simply too lazy to get off the couch? Whatever the reason, forest visitation fell 13 percent across the nation between 2004 and 2007, according to Forest Service surveys.

Even in outdoorsy Region 1 -- which includes Montana, Northern Idaho, Northeast Washington and North Dakota -- trips to the woods have taken a 15 percent dip, falling from 13.2 million to 11.2 million.

Forest officials caution to not take the numbers too seriously. The results are from the National Forest Visitation survey taken from 2004 to 2007 and compared with the previous surveys taken from 2000 to 2003. The surveys are made every five years, so some forests, such as the Gallatin and Custer in Montana, won't complete their second survey until next year. So the numbers don't tell the whole story, accounting for only 40 percent of the nation's forests.

Rating the forest

The survey's questions cover a variety of topics, everything from the cleanliness of restrooms to the quality of trails. They also break down who's visiting, where forest users are traveling from and how long they're staying, a multitude of details that may only be interesting to forest recreation planners.

But the results also point out some bigger themes, such as that white males between the ages of 19 and 59 are the main forest users. Nationally, 63.4 percent of wilderness visitors are male; 95.6 percent are white; and 21 percent are between 40-49 years old.

"Our demographic is changing," said Jim Bedwell, national director of recreation and heritage for the Forest Service. "The demographic of America is changing. Traditionally it's been male and white. Now it's more urban -- 80 percent of the populace -- more ethnically diverse, people who didn't grow up going out into the woods."

Not surprisingly, most forest visitors are there to relax, enjoy the scenery and wildlife and do a bit of hiking.

"One thing that's real constant is a high level of satisfaction -- a 93- to 94-percent satisfaction rate," Bedwell said. "And that doesn't vary a whole lot between developed and wilderness visits."

A changing society

The numbers also may highlight concerns repeatedly voiced by medical professionals about Americans being less active, overweight and spending more time indoors watching television or playing video games, rather than recreating in the wilds. It's even been given a name: nature-deficit disorder.

"Sadly, I think that follows a trend that our population is tending toward more inside, plugged-in, less tied-to-the-land activities," said Dave Cunningham, information officer for the Lewis and Clark National Forest in Great Falls.

The issue and its consequences were examined in depth by author Richard Louv in his book "Last Child in the Woods." Concern over children's loss of connection to the environment has even prompted Leave No Child Inside initiatives in several U.S. cities and by groups to encourage outdoor play. The Forest Service funds several outdoor-oriented programs, as well, including its More Kids in the Woods program.

Forest Chief Gail Kimball noted the importance of such programs, saying an "understanding of why forests are so valuable, along with a strong land ethic" is crucial to future stewardship of public lands.

"The Forest Service does recognize the increasing disconnect between kids and the outdoors," Cunningham said.

No matter the cause, the effects are widespread. Visitation at all forests across the nation fell from 204 million to 178 million between 2004 and 2007. Only Region 3, which includes Arizona and New Mexico, showed a slight increase -- a jump of 2,000 visitors.

Measuring Montana

Because the information for the survey is collected on a five-year rotation, the Custer and Gallatin national forests in southwestern Montana gathered data this year and have not yet quantified their results.

The Gallatin is the most heavily used forest in the Northern Region and one of the top 40 in terms of use nationally, said Marna Daley, information officer for the Gallatin in Bozeman. Given that the majority of the forest's use is from surrounding communities and those communities continue to grow, she said the Gallatin expects to see an increase from its previous survey, in 2002-03, when 2.2 million visitors were counted.

Montana forests that completed their surveys in 2007 were the Lewis and Clark, Bitterroot and Kootenai. The Flathead and Beaverhead forests completed surveys in 2005.

On the Kootenai National Forest, annual visits fell from 1.3 million in 2002 to 919,000 in 2007. Wilderness visits fell from 18,000 to 12,000.

On the Lewis and Clark National Forest, total annual visits fell from 481,000 to 406,000 between 2001 and 2007. In contrast, though, wilderness visits rose more than 60 percent, climbing from 28,000 to 45,000.

The Bitterroot National Forest was the lone bright spot, showing a 16 percent increase in visitation -- climbing from 711,000 visitors to 824,000. Yet at the same time, the survey showed wilderness visits plummeting from 129,000 to 42,000.

Forest officials aren't sounding any alarm bells just yet.

"I would caution against taking any of these numbers too literally," Bedwell said. "It's really an incomplete data set to make any huge conclusions about."

"We shouldn't assume a trend based on a two-year analysis," Cunningham said. "Things that may have discouraged use -- such as a hot, dry summer, fires, a low snow year or the price of gasoline -- all could affect visitation year to year. After we have four or more data sets, that's when we may start drawing

conclusions."

Charging fees

The group Western Slope No-Fee Coalition, based in Colorado, has already concluded that the decline in forest visitation is in part due to the Forest Service's move to charge more fees.

"Fees were already driving many families away from public lands, even while times were good," said Kitty Benzar, president of the group, in a press release. "The economic crisis we're facing now will exacerbate a very worrisome trend. As household budgets are cut to the bare bones, visiting a national forest will be just another luxury item that can be done without."

The coalition has lobbied strenuously against adding fees for use of forest amenities, such as trails and day-use areas. But with forest budgets hammered by the high cost of fighting fires, the fees are all that has kept some campgrounds and rental cabins open. Under the agency's Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, money from the fees is returned to the forest for use at the sites.

But Benzar sees a ripple effect from charging fees.

"This is hitting rural areas from two directions," she said. "First, they often depend on tourism and anything that adds to travel costs slows that and hits their economies hard. Second, almost half of forest visitors are locals living within 50 miles, and they are the folks least able to afford these access fees."

The Forest Service's Bedwell disagrees that fees are discouraging visitors.

"We don't see data that indicates that," he said. "We have less fall-off in developed sites where we charge fees than undeveloped sites. Seventy-five percent of developed sites in Montana are free. Across the U.S., 98 percent have no fees."