Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Assessment of Satisfaction with Site Conditions and Preferred Management Actions
among Visitors and Tour Operators at El Yunque National Forest in Puerto Rico
Taylor V. Stein, Ph.D. University of Florida
Natalia Buta, Ph.D. Frostburg State University
Tinelle Bustam, Ph.D. US Forest Service
2015 Society of Outdoor Recreation Professionals, Annapolis, Maryland
Outline
El Yunque National Forest (EYNF)
Description of study
Study purpose and methods
Results
Visitor surveys and in-depth interviews with tour operators
Discussion
Questions
Why El Yunque National Forest?
El Yunque National Forest
Cultural, Economic & Environmental Importance
Spiritual
Recreation
~1.2 million visitors per year
Economic
Ecotourism
12% local economy (2004)
Cruises
Ecosystem services
8 major rivers headwaters
Biodiversity hub
El Yunque National Forest (EYNF)
28,000 acres
Tropical/Cloud Rainforest
Native Taino indians considered it sacred ground
200+ species of trees & plants, 100 species of vertebrates, ~35+ endemic to the forest
El Yunque … too popular for it’s own good?
High use numbers in confined areas
Impacts to the environment
Immediate Dilemma
US Forest Service must:
Ensure quality recreation experiences
Maintain quality environmental conditions
Therefore, identify appropriate balance of
Development – to accommodate visitors
Protection – to protect the ecosystem
Study Purpose
To explore satisfaction with site conditions and preferred management actions among the diversity of visitors and tour operators at EYNF.
Goals:
Understand visitors’ (locals and non-locals) and tour operators satisfaction with site conditions at El Yunque, and investigate their preferred management solutions to address current problems at the forest.
How do visitors vs. tour operators differ in terms of their satisfaction with site conditions and preferred management actions?
Methods
Visitor Exit Surveys – July and August 2013 and January 2014 (total of 972 completed surveys)
Systematic Random Sampling – every 3rd person exiting a recreation site (5 sites selected) was invited to participate in the study
21 days of data collection in July and 16 days in January
In-depth interviews were conducted with 12 tour operators.
Questionnaire
Your Experience at El Yunque National Forest…
Recreation activity participation (frequency of visitation; hours spent at EYNF; sites visited; purpose of visitation; motivations; traveling group; etc.)
Importance and satisfaction with site conditions
Social interactions during visit (number of encounters; perceptions of crowding)
Perceptions of conflict and possible management actions
Socio-demographic information
Methods: Interviews with Tour Operators Twelve in-depth semi-structured
interviews were conducted with tour operators
Five open ended questions:
Services provided
Satisfaction with site conditions at the forest
Crowding perceptions
Perceived problems at the forest
Possible management actions
All interviews were conducted in January 2014
Visitor Surveys: Study Sites
Visitor surveys locations
Mt. Britton Trailhead
Palo Colorado
Sierra Palm
Big Tree Trailhead
Angelito Trail & Puento Roto
Results Visitor Surveys
Visitor Description
Demographics: Summer 2013
41% 59%
Gender
Male Female
69%
31%
Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
18 to 25years
26 to 35years
36 to 45years
46 to 55years
56 to 65years
Over 65years
Age
Demographics – Winter 2014
40%
60%
Gender
Male Female
34%
66%
Ethnicity
Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
18 to 25
years
26 to 35
years
36 to 45
years
46 to 55
years
56 to 65
years
Over 65
years
Age
Place of residence
22%
69%
9%
Winter 2014 Data
Puerto Rico United States Other49% 49%
2%
Summer 2013 Data
Puerto Rico United States Other
82.6% identified themselves as white
72.7% identified themselves as white
Recreation Participation
Summer 2013
53.8% never visited to EL Yunque.
53.0% spent between 3 to 4 hours at the forest.
The most visited site was La Mina/Palo Colorado (28.7%).
Average of 2 to 3 sites visited (68.0%).
Travel group size – 1 to 4 people (55.6%)
Winter 2014
68.3% never visited El Yunque.
57.0% spent between 3 to 4 hours at the forest.
The most visited site was La Mina/Palo Colorado (27.5%).
Average of 2 to 3 sites visited (70.6%).
Travel group size - 1 to 4 people (68.5%)
Recreation Participation
Purpose of visitation: nature viewing, hiking/walking, photography, scenic driving, and waterplay
Visitor from US and other countries more inclined to report hiking/ walking and nature study
Visitors from PR more
inclined to select jogging/running, picnicking and waterplay
Importance and Satisfaction with Site Conditions
Summer 2013
Summer 2013: Priorities Identified
Site Conditions
Concentrate Here Adequate number of restroom facilities
Clean restrooms and in proper working order
Adequate parking
Availability of trash containers
General information available
No signs of vandalism at the site
Availability of information services away from the visitor center
Adequate ranger/visitor assistance patrols
Enough directional signage
Current and accurate information
Availability of safety information
Summer Priorities – Locals vs non-locals Satisfaction with Site Conditions Locals Non-locals p-value
Adequate number of restroom facilities
3.32 3.73 .003
Clean restrooms and in proper working order
3.33 3.79 .001
Adequate parking 3.92 3.69 .058
Availability of trash containers 3.88 3.92 .693
General information available 3.76 4.00 .044
No signs of vandalism at the site 4.02 3.78 .035
Availability of information services away from the visitor center
3.91 3.96 .651
Adequate ranger/visitor assistance patrols
3.81 4.04 .045
Enough directional signage 3.93 3.97 .706
Current and accurate information
3.87 4.13 .019
Availability of safety information 3.77 4.07 .005
Winter 2014
Winter 2014: Priorities Identified
Site Conditions
Concentrate Here Opportunity to encounter wildlife
Clean restrooms and in proper working order
General information available
Enough directional signage
Nature/historical information about the site
Both in summer 2013 (81.5%) and winter 2014 (83.4%), the participants rated the quality of their experience at the most recently visited site at 8 or higher on a 1 to 10 scale.
Winter Priorities – Locals vs non-locals
Satisfaction with Site Conditions
Locals Non-locals p-value
Opportunity to encounter wildlife
3.19 3.37 .268
Clean restrooms and in proper working order
3.51 3.63 .489
General information available
3.82 3.80 .884
Enough directional signage 3.79 3.92 .414
Nature/historical information about the site
3.95 3.98 .805
Management Preferences
Preferred Management Actions
Summer 2013 Management Actions
Percent M
Most Agreement… 1 2 3 4 5 Establish a fine… 10.6 4.2 22.8 23.5 38.8 3.76
Provide low impact recreation educational programs to visitors
10.4 5.3 29.4 31.6 23.4 3.52
Increase number of facilities 10.1 8.5 28.2 28.4 24.8 3.49
Least Agreement… Establish a maximum number and close the site
18.9 15.9 30.0 22.5 12.8 2.94
Require entrance fee for some sites 35.7 13.3 22.4 16.2 12.4 2.56
Require an entrance fee for all sites 39.8 17.0 21.2 11.5 10.4 2.36
Scale 1 = Strongly Disagree; 3 = Neutral; 5 = Strongly agree.
Management Preferences - Locals vs. Non-locals (Summer 2013)
Summer 2013 Management Actions
Locals Non-locals p-value
Most Agreement…
Establish a fine… 3.80 3.70 .424
Provide low impact recreation educational programs to visitors
3.62 3.43 .110
Increase number of facilities 3.62 3.38 .045
Least Agreement…
Establish a maximum number and close the site
2.89 2.99 .447
Require entrance fee for some sites
2.42 2.68 .049
Require an entrance fee for all sites
2.22 2.48 .049
Preferred Management Actions Winter 2014 Management actions
Percent
Most agreement… 1 2 3 4 5 M Establish a fine … 7.6 5.5 19.9 30.6 36.4 3.83
Provide low impact recreation education
7.0 8.5 31.2 34.0 19.3 3.50
Provide signage and information to change behavior
10.3 11.4 31.8 28.7 17.8 3.32
Least agreement… Establish a maximum number and close site
16.4 21.9 28.9 24.2 8.6 2.87
Require ent. fee for some sites 33.6 18.4 26.0 15.5 6.6 2.43
Require ent. fee for all sites 39.5 21.3 22.9 10.6 5.7 2.22
Scale 1 = Strongly Disagree; 3 = Neutral; 5 = Strongly agree.
Management Preferences - Locals vs. Non-locals (Winter 2014)
Winter 2014 Management actions
Locals Non-locals
P-value
Most agreement…
Establish a fine … 4.02 3.77 .082
Provide low impact recreation education
3.72 3.44 .043
Provide signage and information to change behavior
3.44 3.29 .289
Least agreement…
Establish a maximum number and close site
2.73 2.91 .233
Require ent. fee for some sites 2.27 2.47 .207
Require ent. fee for all sites 4.02 3.77 .082
Results Outfitter Interviews
Services Provided
Multiple vehicles, from mini-buses (25 passenger vehicle) to vans (10 to 14 passenger vehicles)
The tour groups are typically accompanied by the driver and a tour guide, but not in all cases.
Trips tend to be 5 to 6 hours long, with 3 to 4 hours spent at the forest visiting on average 5 sites/stops.
The most visited sites are: El Portal, Yokahu Tower, La Coca Falls, Caimitillo trail, La Mina from Palo Colorado and Big Tree Trailhead, and Bano Grande.
“We move more volume than do personalized tours.”
Site Conditions - Priorities
Parking, roads, bathrooms, trails and their condition
Natural environment (e.g. vegetation, flowers, birds, beautiful views)
Better facilities for people with disabilities
Safety and security
Staff presence
Signage
Satisfaction with Overall Site Conditions: 8 out of 10
Perceived Management Solutions
Communication and Education
Communication with outfitters
Trainings for tour guides
More educational programs for visitors
Staff and Facilities
Increased USFS staff
Road and trail maintenance
Designated parking for tour busses only
General Recommendations
More recreation options/sites – e.g., more trails needed
Everybody should pay at the visitor center
Keep a count on the number of vehicles entering the forest
Visitors vs. Tour Operators – Priorities
Agreement in regard to:
Availability of facilities (restrooms, parking, trash containers)
Information and signage (including safety information and ranger assistance)
Protecting the natural environment
Visitors vs. Tour Operators – Management Preferences
Agreement in regard to:
Need for educational programs
Well-maintained facilities and possible new facilities
Information services and signage; better communication
Disagreement in regard to:
Establishing an entrance fee – tour operators emphasized the need for all visitors to pay an entrance fee
Establishing a fine for not following forest recreation rules and regulations – not emphasized by tour operators
Discussion
Both visitors and tour operators clearly emphasized the need for an effective communication and education in addressing visitation concerns.
Providing communication and educational programs in encouraging desired behaviors is commonly agreed upon (Marion & Reid, 2007; Jensen, 2000).
Establishing user fees tends to raise concerns in terms of justice and social equity (Chung et al., 2011); in this context the possible implications of such a policy are not negligible.
Discussion:
This study calls attention to the diversity of groups recreation managers need to take into consideration when addressing satisfaction with site conditions and management preferences issues.
Management Implications
Focus on Protection
Increase development to accommodate crowds would likely detract from visitors’ needs.
Manage through Communication/Education
Develop a long-term communications strategy to provide visitors and outfitters/guides with information to access different recreation areas throughout El Yunque.
Alert visitors and guides to crowded areas.
More value/ more services for tour operators considering the fee charged for their tour groups.
Disperse use primarily in summer
Facilities at areas primarily used by locals
Thank you!
El Yunque National Forest for funding and staff assistance
Questions…
