New Hampshire Break-Ins

[Dugan]

This is probably the only way you WILL get enough data to make this worthwhile

Agreed. The data set you've suggested is not nearly comprehensive enough. Gathering information from on line hiking boards will not capture a significant portion of the affected population. In addition, it is skewed in that it doesn't capture total parking statistics, i.e. unaffected cars.

I think that, if you're going to go ahead with this, the time you plan to spend data mining would be better spent gathering the police statistics.

Poor data yields poor statistics which can lead to poor conclusions.

In other words, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics!

Incomplete stats are worse than useless in that they cannot be used to reliably demonstrate a conclusion. The results would, at best, be an educated guess, which is no improvement over the status quo.

 

[--M.]

Okay, fine, but until you have oysters for pearls, make lemonade from the lemons. Anecdotal evidence hepped me to 19-Mile Brook & Pinkham Notch. Knowing that a given area is generally more or less prone than another may help sway a decision while real stats are still being gathered. Decisions are made on such limited resources all the time; if that's all we have to go on, it's a start.

 

[rocket21]

With limited submissions so far, here are a few trends:
- Sunday was the most common day in which a break in may have happened.
- There is a 50/50 split between day trip break-ins and overnighter break-ins.
- 50% of the break-ins involved theft of money or credit cards.
- So far, none of the break-in victims had an anti-theft device.

 

[MichaelJ]

- 50% of the break-ins involved theft of money or credit cards.

Sigh. Even knowing full well these victims are on this board, I will still criticize the 50% who left such items in their cars. As long as thieves feel they will get a positive return on their investment, they're going to keep trying. Give them a few weekend break-in sprees of getting nothing, and they're going to start hesitating to take the risk for no reward.

My motto is to take it in the pack or leave it at home, for everyone's benefit.

 

[David Metsky]

With limited submissions so far, here are a few trends:
- Sunday was the most common day in which a break in may have happened.
- There is a 50/50 split between day trip break-ins and overnighter break-ins.
- 50% of the break-ins involved theft of money or credit cards.
- So far, none of the break-in victims had an anti-theft device.

Without knowing how many people in total park at trailheads on weekends vs weekdays, go on overnights vs daytrips, leave money in their cars, or have anti-theft devices it's hard to draw an conclusions. You don't know the sample set, how many break-ins total have been reported, so you don't know if your sample size is enough to be meaningful

I've been parking at trail heads in the Whites probably 25 times a year for the past 25 years, and I've never had a break-in. You don't have trends yet, you have anecdotes.

 

[rocket21]

Sigh. Even knowing full well these victims are on this board, I will still criticize the 50% who left such items in their cars.

I should clarify that one of these instances, we're talking loose change and tokens...its amazing what people will break in for.

 

[Grumpy]

Sigh. Even knowing full well these victims are on this board, I will still criticize the 50% who left such items in their cars. As long as thieves feel they will get a positive return on their investment, they're going to keep trying. Give them a few weekend break-in sprees of getting nothing, and they're going to start hesitating to take the risk for no reward.

My motto is to take it in the pack or leave it at home, for everyone's benefit.

Splendid comment, if you are driving directly to the trailhead from home, and returning directly back to home.

Thing is, not all of us can operate that way.

Mrs. Grumpy and I, for decades, have traveled a day or days from home and set up multi-day bases at public campgrounds, from which we drive out to area trailheads and do day hikes. Hiking is not our sole activity on these excursions, and so we have "other" paraphernalia -- like photo gear -- along with us. Being tent or leanto campers, the only place we have to lock up such "valuables" is our vehicle. Not very comforting, frankly, but it's our only practical choice, other than staying home. We recognize the risk and take what precautions we can.

I suspect the real solution to trailhead vehicle break-ins is stepped up police patrolling and surveillance. But that is costly, and in an era of tight budgets, expecting it to happen probably is unrealistic.

G.

 

[Pete_Hickey]

I should clarify that one of these instances, we're talking loose change and tokens...its amazing what people will break in for.

Oh, I suspect they don't break in for the loose change. They do it because they THINK there is something worthwhile there, when they find there isn't, they take what they can.

I say that because my car was recently broken into (at a university conference, not at a trailhead) I suspect they did it, because they thought the sleeping bag thrown across the back seat was hiding something. They didn't find anything there, and went to the trunk and took things they didn'T see. Note that my Axe was on the back seat, but they didn't take that.

 

[Dugan]

Without knowing how many people in total park at trailheads on weekends vs weekdays, go on overnights vs daytrips, leave money in their cars, or have anti-theft devices it's hard to draw an conclusions. You don't know the sample set, how many break-ins total have been reported, so you don't know if your sample size is enough to be meaningful

Exactly what I meant earlier. The data set is too small, the sample is not representative. This is anecdotal evidence only, which is a long way from showing approximate probabilities.

How many cars were parked? What percentage of the parked cars were broken into? Did you capture the bulk of break-ins? Where in the area were the "safe" cars? Does make/model/year play a role? Color? Stickers? License plate local?

I suspect your anecdotes are too heavily weighted to Sundays. If you've left your car overnight and return Sunday, it's just as likely the break in occurred Saturday as Sunday.

I appreciate the effort you're trying to make to keep us all safer. However, I think it is far too simplistic and limited to be meaningful.

As long as thieves feel they will get a positive return on their investment, they're going to keep trying. Give them a few weekend break-in sprees of getting nothing, and they're going to start hesitating to take the risk for no reward.

There you go. Positive and negative reinforcers modifying human behavior, demonstrated in real life.

 

[rocket21]

It's not perfect, nor will it ever be. Even if I had time to look into police reports, etc., that doesn't mean those are accurate either - there is actually a measurable amount of fraud in reporting damaged or stolen property. Nothing short of posting up at every trailhead parking lot at the same time will return nearly perfect results.

Nonetheless, compiling the data this way can only help. The second part of this project I'm considering pursuing is to compile strategies that others take to prevent theft. If this data prevents so much as one break-in, I'd say its worthwhile.

 

[DougPaul]

It's not perfect, nor will it ever be. Even if I had time to look into police reports, etc., that doesn't mean those are accurate either - there is actually a measurable amount of fraud in reporting damaged or stolen property.

Perfect data is, pragmatically, not available. The best data would most likely be that held by and possibly available from the police. Insurance companies also collect and analyze this kind of data. Self-reported data (eg to websites) is notoriously inaccurate.

The information most useful to one who would like to park his car somewhere is the probability that the car will be broken into. Factors such as location, time of day, day of the week, vehicle type, various anti-theft strategies, etc might be explored if one had adequate unbiased data.

Also, for the theft data to be useful, one would also need data on how heavily the parking lots are used on what days. (For instance, the theft data will likely show far more theft on weekends than on weekdays, if only because there are a lot more cars in the parking lots on weekends. However, a weekend could still be safer because the probability of an individual car being broken into might still be lower.)

There are lots of pitfalls in collecting and analyzing these data. No offence to anyone attemting to do so, but unless you know enough about statistics, you will almost certainly make errors which will make the conclusions wrong or unreliable.

Doug

 

[rocket21]

Perfect data is, pragmatically, not available. The best data would most likely be that held by and possibly available from the police. Insurance companies also collect and analyze this kind of data. Self-reported data (eg to websites) is notoriously inaccurate.

The information most useful to one who would like to park his car somewhere is the probability that the car will be broken into. Factors such as location, time of day, day of the week, vehicle type, various anti-theft strategies, etc might be explored if one had adequate unbiased data.

Also, for the theft data to be useful, one would also need data on how heavily the parking lots are used on what days. (For instance, the theft data will likely show far more theft on weekends than on weekdays, if only because there are a lot more cars in the parking lots on weekends. However, a weekend could still be safer because the probability of an individual car being broken into might still be lower.)

There are lots of pitfalls in collecting and analyzing these data. No offence to anyone attemting to do so, but unless you know enough about statistics, you will almost certainly make errors which will make the conclusions wrong or unreliable.

Doug

I think there is some confusion...I'm not concerned with probabilities or parking lot usage...if this were for a college research project or even a government grant, I would never consider basing it on the data I'm collecting right now.

I'm not necessarily sure about bias...it's not a political survey or something nor do I think there will be attempts to pollute the data to achieve desired results. While it's certainly not a full analysis of all hikers, the nature of it being confined to internet forum users for the most part doesn't make it irrelevant - after all, we all belong to that particular group...if anything, it could be more relevant toward the audience.

Maybe the results will be useful, maybe not. It never hurts to have more data to base personal decisions off.

 

[albee]

There are lots of pitfalls in collecting and analyzing these data. No offence to anyone attemting to do so, but unless you know enough about statistics, you will almost certainly make errors which will make the conclusions wrong or unreliable.

Doug, I don't think anyone's going to be basing a Thesis on this project. Collecting and disseminating at least some information, however accurate or inaccurate, would be useful for the general hiking community. It's not like I'm going to feel free to leave my keys in the ignition at Lincoln Woods because the data shows that nobody got broken into there. People should look at these findings objectively and take what they will from them.

As far as I know, we as hikers have never seen any kind of semi-organized study as to what trailheads see vandalism. Bringing any kind of information to light can only help to educate people. Anyone arguing that this is a pointless, inaccurate, or unhelpful exercise is either misunderstanding the point or arguing just for argument's sake. If some of us look at the data and learn something about how to avoid a break-in or which trailheads seem to be more risky, then I feel this project will be a success. Maybe it won't catch anyone or reduce the breakins-per-vehicle-per-day, but IMO raising awareness of the problem can't hurt.

 

[DougPaul]

Albee and rocket21:

My concern is that someone will put (potentially a lot of) effort into such a study and if it is not properly done, it will mislead people.

Many of the statistical issues are not difficult, but appropriate knowledge is necessary to be able to interpret the data accurately. IMO, bad data or misinterpreted data is worse than none at all.

Doug

 

[Rob S]

Sigh. Even knowing full well these victims are on this board, I will still criticize the 50% who left such items in their cars. As long as thieves feel they will get a positive return on their investment, they're going to keep trying. Give them a few weekend break-in sprees of getting nothing, and they're going to start hesitating to take the risk for no reward.

My motto is to take it in the pack or leave it at home, for everyone's benefit.

Well stated, I agree 100%

Splendid comment, if you are driving directly to the trailhead from home, and returning directly back to home.

Thing is, not all of us can operate that way.

Mrs. Grumpy and I, for decades, have traveled a day or days from home and set up multi-day bases at public campgrounds, from which we drive out to area trailheads and do day hikes. Hiking is not our sole activity on these excursions, and so we have "other" paraphernalia -- like photo gear -- along with us. Being tent or leanto campers, the only place we have to lock up such "valuables" is our vehicle. Not very comforting, frankly, but it's our only practical choice, other than staying home. We recognize the risk and take what precautions we can.

I suspect the real solution to trailhead vehicle break-ins is stepped up police patrolling and surveillance. But that is costly, and in an era of tight budgets, expecting it to happen probably is unrealistic.

Agreed. In the situation you describe, you have no choice but to leave valuables in the car, regardless of whether they are carefully hidden or not. But I don't think that your scenario is a common attribute among the reported break-ins, .... maybe I'm wrong.

The second part of this project I'm considering pursuing is to compile strategies that others take to prevent theft. If this data prevents so much as one break-in, I'd say its worthwhile.

Good idea. On the original thread, I posted about the Dr Wu strategy of discouraging thefts. It may seem funny, but I think it's a good idea ...... I now purposely keep a lot of crap (empty soda cans, wrappers, etc) on the floors of my XTerra, and it's usually filthy dirty on the outside just from the drive to the trailhead. And I never leave anything of value inside. Although I've never been broken into, I realize this is not statistical evidence, I probably have just been lucky. But anything to increase the odds that a would-be thief passes by my vehicle for a more appealing target is worthwhile to try, IMO.

 

[rocket21]

Albee and rocket21:

My concern is that someone will put (potentially a lot of) effort into such a study and if it is not properly done, it will mislead people.

Agreed...the last thing I want this to do is to make people think that, for instance, having an anti-theft device ensures they won't have any problems. I'm confident that with the nature of the study, such conclusions won't be drawn (if someone does conclude that having a car alarm will prevent break ins in the middle nowhere, then they probably have larger problems!).

At this point, I'm actually more interested in techniques people use to avoid break-ins...my time is a bit limited though, so one thing at a time.

 

[Dugan]

Albee and rocket21:

My concern is that someone will put (potentially a lot of) effort into such a study and if it is not properly done, it will mislead people.

Many of the statistical issues are not difficult, but appropriate knowledge is necessary to be able to interpret the data accurately. IMO, bad data or misinterpreted data is worse than none at all.

Doug

Exactly what I'm trying to say.

For example:
5 cars were broken into at Lincoln Woods, as reported by people aware of and reporting to this project.

This tells us nothing other than, assuming the reports are accurate, that 5 cars were broken into. How many cars were there? How many others were broken into? There's a big difference between 5 of 5 and 5 of 100.

This is no different than the information available to us now: some vehicles were broken into at such-and-such location.

 

[albee]

Many of the statistical issues are not difficult, but appropriate knowledge is necessary to be able to interpret the data accurately. IMO, bad data or misinterpreted data is worse than none at all.

I don't quite understand... Are you both advocating that it would be better if we all remained ignorant of this situation? These threads would not be getting thousands of page views if this wasn't an issue that people are concerned about. Are you arguing that it isn't a "statistic" unless you can get a representative sample of the population? You would be correct but your argument wouldn't be beneficial to our hiking community.

Could you please provide one example of how this data would be misinterpreted?

Will this study understate the number of break-ins? Absolutely. Will it provide fail-safe guidelines for when and where to park in the Whites? Absolutely not. I would argue that at worst this results in anecdotal evidence, and putting a simple disclaimer on the results would suffice... such as *These are the results of an unofficial study on trailhead vandalism in the White Mountains, break-ins could potentially occur at any trailhead regardless of whether valuables are visible or not.

Disclaimer: I am not involved in this study at all, but I support Rocket21's right to independently collect data for whatever he wishes to do with it.

Here's an example: The owner of the only car that has ever been vandalized at the AT trailhead in Grafton Notch responds to this survey. The 13 people who's cars got broken into at Greeley Ponds trailhead last weekend don't respond. Are people hiking from either location more or less likely to be concerned about their vehicles? Will the incomplete data adversely affect either group of people? Doubtful, but it doesn't hurt to know, now, does it?

 

[rocket21]

This is no different than the information available to us now: some vehicles were broken into at such-and-such location.

It's all about trends...if we see that a lot of break ins submitted were at one parking lot, it might be enough to say "hey, let's be careful here" or "hey, maybe we should try a different trail." Or, if we're seeing that a lot of thefts are involving taking exterior pieces off a car, it might be enough to say "I'm not taking my Jeep with the nice rims this weekend" Who knows. But compiled data can be more useful than just scattered anecdotes. Right now as it stands, I only have about half a dozen submissions so far, so it's hard to say much of anything. The form's been up for just over a day, so maybe there will be a few more added in the coming days. Who knows.

 

[marchowes]

These threads would not be getting thousands of page views if this wasn't an issue that people are concerned about.

I think this one is getting big hits because people are biccering and.. well by gosh -- on topic or off it just makes for entertaining reading material

That and this topic is posted on hike-nh and alpinezone and isn't getting any more attention than anything else...