Hiking Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Women's Hiking Statistics for 2026

Do women make up most hikers, or are women more likely to hike? Those questions require different denominators. A share of hikers describes an audience; a participation rate describes activity within the female population. Confusing them can reverse the meaning of a comparison.

This collection keeps those measures separate across recent Australian and Swiss research, observed Swiss footwear and selected Japanese, Norwegian and Appalachian Trail samples. Male and age-group comparisons provide context without being relabelled as findings about women. These sources do not support a single worldwide participation rate.

Headline figures

  • Australia: bushwalking participation among women aged 15+ was 18.3% during July 2025–June 2026. (Australian Sports Commission, Oct 2026)
  • Australia: an estimated 2,110,746 women aged 15+ participated in bushwalking during July 2025–June 2026. (Australian Sports Commission, Oct 2026)
  • New South Wales: bushwalking participation among women aged 15+ was 18.9% during July 2025–June 2026. (Australian Sports Commission, Oct 2026)
  • Australia: bushwalking participation among men aged 15+ was 16.0% during July 2025–June 2026. (Australian Sports Commission, Oct 2026)
  • Australian women aged 15+: organised bushwalking participation was 2.4% during July 2025–June 2026. (Australian Sports Commission, Oct 2026)
  • Women represented 54% of hikers in Switzerland's resident population aged 15+, based on Sport Schweiz 2026 and 2025 fieldwork. (BASPO / Swiss Sport Observatory, Aug 2026)
  • Switzerland, 2025 fieldwork: hiking participation among women aged 60–74: 59%. (BASPO / Swiss Sport Observatory, Aug 2026)
  • In Switzerland's 2025 fieldwork, 10.7% of residents aged 15+ named hiking as their main sport. (BASPO / Swiss Sport Observatory, Aug 2026)
  • Among hikers observed on selected Swiss mountain paths in summer 2024, high hiking/mountain boots among women: 58%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Among hikers observed on selected Swiss mountain paths in summer 2024, running shoes among women: 16%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Women represented 34.8% of respondents in The Trek's self-selected 2025 Appalachian Trail survey. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Women represented 51% of on-site visitor-survey respondents at Reinheimen National Park, Norway, in summer 2022. (NINA, May 2023)

Where do Australian women participate in bushwalking?

Population scale and participation rate answer different planning questions. AusPlay's weighted estimates describe adult residents, so a smaller state can show a high participation rate while containing fewer participants.

How do regional participation rates compare?

The regional rates below describe bushwalking within the female resident population. They do not count visits to trails in those states or territories. AusPlay's adult definition includes older teenagers. These are annual participation estimates for the stated reporting period, with sampling uncertainty instead of a complete census. Close values should not become definitive rankings. A respondent can participate while travelling elsewhere, so the residence table cannot establish the location of the activity or its benefit to a particular trail destination.

How many women participated in the larger eastern states?

Estimated participant numbers add population scale to the rate comparison. They are weighted estimates of people reporting participation, not counts of trips or trail-counter passages. The published workbook retains unrounded estimates; this article rounds people to whole numbers and rates to the displayed decimal precision. Such precision does not remove the margin of error. Counts across residences can help describe the size of the participating population, while they cannot establish equipment ownership, trip duration or spending. Repeated outings by a participant do not create additional participants in this annual measure. The figures also should not be interpreted as a count of people hiking only within their home state.

What do the other regional participant estimates show?

The remaining estimates cover the territories and other states. Their smaller populations make it particularly important to distinguish a percentage from the estimated number of participants. All figures use the same activity and reporting period. Differences between locations do not by themselves explain access, motivation or barriers. Nor can a count reveal whether participation was frequent or occasional. The source's sampling uncertainty remains relevant, particularly for smaller geographic populations. Trail managers would need destination-specific evidence to translate these residence-based estimates into expected local use.

How do male participation and organised activity provide context?

A meaningful comparison uses the same population base and activity question. Organised participation is a narrower measure than all bushwalking, and the source also includes gender categories that are not separately tabulated.

What were the regional male participation rates?

The male estimates use the same annual activity question as the female estimates. They provide a comparison within each residence, not an explanation of why a difference exists. These are population participation rates instead of the male share of hikers. Survey uncertainty limits conclusions about small differences. Any causal explanation involving access, preferences or social circumstances would require additional evidence.

How many men were estimated to participate?

Estimated male participant numbers provide another view of population scale. The national and regional observations should not be added together, because the regions are included in the national estimate. AusPlay records non-binary and self-described gender within the overall estimate but does not separately publish those groups because of sample size. Consequently, adding male and female estimates does not reproduce the total. This is a source-definition issue, not a reason to force the numbers to balance. The estimates concern people instead of visits, and differences in population size remain important when comparing regions.

What do the remaining estimates and organised activity show?

The remaining male estimates complete the residence comparison. The organised-activity observation below uses a narrower participation question, alongside the all-gender national context. Organised participation should not be described as the share of female bushwalkers in a club: its base is the female adult population. The estimate can include different organising arrangements, and this selected figure does not specify which one a participant used. Broader participation also includes activity outside those arrangements. Neither measure establishes the frequency or quality of someone's outdoor experience.

How does Swiss hiking participation vary by age and sex?

Age-specific rates show why an overall gender comparison can conceal different patterns across life stages. Sport Schweiz separates participation within demographic groups from the composition of hikers and from activity during sports holidays.

Which age groups reported hiking participation?

The age-group figures describe participation within each listed group. They should not be interpreted as that group's share of the people encountered on a trail. Older male comparisons appear below; the selected older female observation is in the takeaways. The survey combines hiking and mountain hiking, which is not identical to every other country's activity wording. Its age bands also differ from the Australian adult categories, preventing direct age-standardised comparisons from these headline figures alone.

What does the wider Swiss participation profile show?

The wider profile places age-specific findings alongside overall participation and reported activity frequency. These observations describe all hikers or residents under the stated measure, not women alone. The change is measured in percentage points against the earlier study, instead of as a relative percentage decline. Frequency is a reported central measure and cannot establish every participant's routine. Mean age describes the participating group, while age-specific participation describes a different denominator. Those distinctions matter when comparing a population survey with a visitor sample collected on a particular trail.

How do language regions and sports holidays differ?

Language-region estimates describe residents, while the holiday figures concern hiking during sports holidays. The holiday group therefore answers a narrower question than general annual participation. A sports holiday is not interchangeable with an ordinary day walk near home. The women's share of that group describes composition instead of a female participation rate. Similarly, the mean age does not show how likely a person at that age is to take such a holiday. These findings can inform audience descriptions, but they cannot measure spending, destination choice or the reasons behind regional differences.

What did researchers observe about hiking footwear?

Observed equipment provides a different kind of evidence from a participation questionnaire. BFU's field observations describe the hikers present in its sample, without proving that a shoe type caused or prevented an injury.

How did men's and women's observed footwear compare?

  • Observed high hiking/mountain boots among men: 58%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among men: 26%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among women: 23%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed running shoes among men: 15%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among men: 1%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among women: 2%. (BFU, Sep 2025)

The observed categories distinguish high boots, lower hiking footwear, running shoes and other shoes. The selected women's observations in the takeaways belong to the same field study. These are shares within observed sex groups, not population ownership rates. A person might own several shoe types and choose differently for another outing. The survey does not establish whether footwear fitted correctly, matched conditions or influenced an incident. Small rounded differences should not become claims about one group's competence. The category boundaries are those used by the field researchers.

What did younger age groups wear?

  • Observed high hiking/mountain boots among age 15–29: 56%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed high hiking/mountain boots among age 30–49: 52%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among age 15–29: 21%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among age 30–49: 26%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed running shoes among age 15–29: 21%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed running shoes among age 30–49: 20%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among age 15–29: 2%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among age 30–49: 2%. (BFU, Sep 2025)

Younger and middle-adult age bands showed different mixes of observed footwear. These age comparisons include the study's hikers across sexes, instead of women in those age bands alone. The observations cannot separate the influence of route choice, conditions or preferences. They also do not establish how often participants wore the same shoes elsewhere. Interpreting the table as a record of this sample preserves its value without turning equipment choice into a measure of hiking ability.

How did footwear vary in the older age groups?

  • Observed high hiking/mountain boots among age 50–64: 60%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed high hiking/mountain boots among age 65+: 68%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among age 50–64: 24%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed low hiking/trekking/mountain shoes among age 65+: 25%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed running shoes among age 50–64: 15%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed running shoes among age 65+: 6%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among age 50–64: 1%. (BFU, Sep 2025)
  • Observed other footwear among age 65+: 1%. (BFU, Sep 2025)

The older age groups also had distinct observed footwear distributions. The comparison uses the researcher's age bands and should not be combined with population participation rates to estimate national shoe ownership. These are cross-sectional observations, not evidence that individuals change footwear as they age. Differences could reflect the people and routes sampled. The study does not establish an injury risk for any shoe category, and rounded categories should not be treated as exact counts.

How do other surveys change the picture?

A national online sample, a park visitor survey and a long-distance reader survey answer different questions. Comparing them is useful only when each population stays visible instead of becoming a supposed global profile of women who hike.

Who answered the Appalachian Trail reader survey?

  • Survey respondents: men 62.7%. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: non-binary 2.2%. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: mean age 44 years. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: median age 37 years. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: modal age 26 years. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: youngest age 12 years. (The Trek, Dec 2025)
  • Survey respondents: oldest age 73 years. (The Trek, Dec 2025)

The Trek's voluntary survey describes a long-distance hiking audience, including different journey outcomes. Its age and gender observations therefore cannot represent every visitor to the Appalachian Trail. The women's share appears in the takeaways. The source's gender graphic has an apparent error in its nonresponse label; that category is not reproduced. The mean, median and mode describe different features of the age distribution. A wide age range is not evidence that every age group has the same participation rate or chance of completing a journey.

What did the Reinheimen visitor study measure?

  • Reinheimen mean visitor age: 47 years. (NINA, May 2023)
  • Reinheimen visitor parties with children under fifteen: 16%. (NINA, May 2023)

The Norwegian study describes visitors to one national park during its field season. Its age and party-composition findings are local context instead of national participation estimates. The women's share of visitors is listed above. The child-related observation concerns parties containing a child, not the proportion of all individual visitors who were children. Nor does it identify which adult in a party was a parent or caregiver. Local residents and different visitor groups can be represented unevenly in on-site and follow-up surveys. These limitations prevent the results from establishing how common hiking is among Norwegian women generally, while retaining their value for understanding the park's surveyed audience.

What did Japan's online survey report by gender?

  • Three-year mountain climbing/trail running participation among men: 6%. (Cross Marketing, Mar 2026)
  • Three-year mountain climbing/trail running participation among women: 4%. (Cross Marketing, Mar 2026)
  • Three-year trekking/hiking participation among men: 4%. (Cross Marketing, Mar 2026)
  • Three-year trekking/hiking participation among women: 3%. (Cross Marketing, Mar 2026)

The Japanese survey distinguishes trekking and hiking from a category combining mountain climbing and trail running. Its selected gender figures concern participation during the stated multiyear recall period. Activities could overlap, so the categories must not be added into a unique-hiker total. The population age range also differs from the Swiss and Australian studies. These rounded online-survey estimates are not directly comparable with annual participation or an on-trail visitor profile. Keeping the recall period and activity definitions visible allows a useful comparison of research questions without inventing a league table of national enthusiasm.

Glossary

Methodology and sources

Every figure on this page comes from the organisation that produced it: regulators, statistics offices, public bodies, research institutes, and companies reporting their own data or surveys. Each one links to the original report or dataset and carries its release date. Survey results keep their population and fieldwork period, and financial figures keep the measure the producer used. Figures from different producers are not added together or ranked against each other. The page is reviewed monthly and updated when a producer releases newer data.