The Numbers Continue to Fall

[Northern Thunder]

The census deals with ALL the junior corps that are documented to have existed during each particular year.

To put things into perspective, here are some of the "unknown" North American junior corps that ARE counted as part of the 65 from 2006. They did not compete on the field, however:

Atlantic Guardian--ME

Blue Jays--NY

Chippewa Valley Brigade--WI

Guardian Knights--CA

New Day--WI

North Port Alliance--FL

P.A.L. Buccaneers--CT

Pride of Oakland--CA

Steeltown Brass--ONT

Valley Forge Military Academy--PA

To realize that these corps are counted among the 65 active is pretty scary. I doubt many people on this board are familiar with many of them. When these "unknown" corps are factored in and the number reaches just 65 juniors......

[Northern Thunder]

I wanted to add some other details about the census. Losing junior corps is certainly not a new thing.

Here are some random figures for the number of junior corps lost from the previous season:

1978--net loss of 49 corps

1979--net loss of 55 corps

1984--net loss of 35 corps

The big difference back then was that there were 30-40 brand-new corps coming out each year to partially offset the loss. The losses would have been even more horrendous without these new corps popping up.

Maybe the big mistake came when nobody did anything about it back in the '70's, when TONS of corps folded each year. Today each lost corps is magnified with the smaller number of active corps.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Northern Thunder

[MikeD]

Well...drum corps used to be more "community-based." In many places there was one in almost every town, and they were used as youth outreach programs for churches and whatnot.

I think the number I read was 440 active corps in the US in 1971, just before DCI. Most of them, as you say, were local-based. The top few were the ones who drew members from other smaller corps in their area...the equal in concept of div I today. In 71 Garfield had members from all sorts of NY metro area smaller corps. Very few came from the town of Garfield itself, one reason they had not much to do with us.

Today....10,000+ HS bands, some percentage of them competing...more than drum corps EVER had at one time...USSBA alone has twice that 440 competing...and that is just one band circuit.

The competitive bands replaced the small local corps in providing the competitive experience for tens of thousands of HS students.

Mike

[MikeD]

The big difference back then was that there were 30-40 brand-new corps coming out each year to partially offset the loss. The losses would have been even more horrendous without these new corps popping up.

I have been saying THAT on various corps forums for a long time!

Corps have always died out along the way...only in the 50's and 60's others in the same general area sprung up to take their place. Today...not so easy.

Maybe the big mistake came when nobody did anything about it back in the '70's, when TONS of corps folded each year. Today each lost corps is magnified with the smaller number of active corps.

Not sure how much could have been done...IMO it was primarily changing times that caused the decline in numbers.

Mike

[SoonerFan04]

The census deals with ALL the junior corps that are documented to have existed during each particular year.

To put things into perspective, here are some of the "unknown" North American junior corps that ARE counted as part of the 65 from 2006. They did not compete on the field, however:

Atlantic Guardian--ME

Blue Jays--NY

Chippewa Valley Brigade--WI

Guardian Knights--CA

New Day--WI

North Port Alliance--FL

P.A.L. Buccaneers--CT

Pride of Oakland--CA

Steeltown Brass--ONT

Valley Forge Military Academy--PA

To realize that these corps are counted among the 65 active is pretty scary. I doubt many people on this board are familiar with many of them. When these "unknown" corps are factored in and the number reaches just 65 juniors......

Steeltown Brass is the renamed, co-ed Bandettes - they are known. :)

[Northern Thunder]

This census shows 483 active junior corps for the 1972 season. There were quite a few more than that for the '71 season. It seems that many junior corps went inactive prior to that first DCI era season of 1972.

The number of active juniors earlier in the 1960's was probably nearly twice what the numbers were in the early 1970's.

[shawn craig]

When I was growing up about the only camp there was for parents to send kids to was church camp (at least where I grew up). A few music and sports camps for older students.

Today there are camps, both day and overnight, for almost everything; math, science, all types of sports, music, art, dance, etc.

Provided they can afford them, todays youth have a lot of options and ways to spend their summers.

Edited October 5, 2006 by shawn craig

[Liam]

I wanted to add some other details about the census. Losing junior corps is certainly not a new thing.

Here are some random figures for the number of junior corps lost from the previous season:

1978--net loss of 49 corps

1979--net loss of 55 corps

1984--net loss of 35 corps

The big difference back then was that there were 30-40 brand-new corps coming out each year to partially offset the loss. The losses would have been even more horrendous without these new corps popping up.

Maybe the big mistake came when nobody did anything about it back in the '70's, when TONS of corps folded each year. Today each lost corps is magnified with the smaller number of active corps.

This is an interesting point and exhibits the care that must be taken when trying to draw conclusions from statistics.

Rough numbers based on the above post -- looks like in 1978 for example, we lost about 70-80 corps in one year but added another 30 new ones -- (net loss 49). So, conservatively speaking, lets say we lost 70 of about 400 at the time -- a 17.5% loss rate. We also added 30 -- about a 7.5% gain rate. For roughly a 10% net loss rate.

Now we have 65 corps, give or take, and we might lose 2 or 3 a year. Lets say 4 for the heck of it -- a 6% loss rate. Maybe we gain 1 or 2 a year -- a 1-3% gain rate. Net loss 3-5%.

Statistics can be read many different way, but looking at it this way, one conclusion could be that we're actually doing a better job of keeping the corps we have strong and active. What we're not doing such a good job with is adding new corps to offset the few we do lose.

(edited for numerical mistake ....)

Edited October 5, 2006 by Liam

[ChicagoFan]

I really couldn't care less . . . the corps who have survived have survied, and they've been great.

This is a very encouraging and helpful attitude. You do realize that, given the current rate of attrition, if something is not done to reverse the trend drum corps could find itself on the verge of extinction in a very short time?

[The Oz]

I also think another reason for drum corps decreasing is three fold:

1. Baby Boomers, those born before 1965, aren't having as many kids as our parents did.

<snip>

With due respect;

1970 US population, under 18 years of age - 69 million

2005 US population, under 18 years of age - 73.5 million

Source: U.S. Census Bureau web site

You can argue that more parents having fewer children produce the increase in the under-18 population, which validates your statement. But overall, there does not appear to be a decrease in the number of people available for junior drum corps.

Edited October 5, 2006 by The Oz