Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study STEVEN W. BURR, PH.D. AND CHASE C. LAMBORN, M.S. INSTITUTE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION AND TOURISM UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

Transcription

1 Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study STEVEN W. BURR, PH.D. AND CHASE C. LAMBORN, M.S. INSTITUTE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION AND TOURISM UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

2 Utah State University s Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism To provide a better understanding of the relationships between: outdoor recreation and tourism; natural resources management; community economic vitality; and quality of life issues for the citizens of Utah.

3 A Program Framework for IORT Research/Extension Topics USU-IORT Functions Research Extension Teaching Outdoor Recreation/Tourism Issues Community Sustainability (Social & Economic) Environmental Sustainability (Environmental & Economic) Statewide Collaboration and Coordination

4 Introduction Introduce you to the Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study 1) Why the study was conducted 2) How the study was conducted 3) Some study results and how these can be useful

5 Why the study was conducted Background USU s IORT approached by the Salt Lake Ranger District of the Uinta-Wasatch- Cache National Forest, Save Our Canyons, and Salt Lake City Corporation to develop a research project to collect visitor use data on the district and surrounding lands. Goal of providing useful data and analysis for the Mountain Accord Initiative and other stakeholder groups focused on recreational use of the Central Wasatch Mountains. Product Dataset representative of the recreational use of the Central Wasatch Mountains with associated analysis presented in four quarterly/seasonal reports based on intercept surveys and a fifth report based on a follow-up e-survey.

6 How the study was conducted 48 locations in the CWM were surveyed Surveys were conducted in Bell s Canyon, Little Cottonwood, Big Cottonwood, Millcreek, along the Wasatch Front, Parley s Canyon, and on the Wasatch Back. We also surveyed Brighton, Alta, Snowbird, and Solitude ski resorts. We surveyed anyone who was recreating and was over 18 years old.

7 Four things to keep in mind Random Sampling Surveyed both Dispersed and Developed recreation sites/areas This was a 12 month study. 4,039 intercept surveys were completed, representative of recreational users of the Central Wasatch Mountains.

8 What did we find? Where are CWM visitors coming from?

9 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS Miles Traveled by CWM Visitors Mean = 396 miles Median = 28 miles Range miles 50 0 MILES TRAVELED

10 What types of areas are they using? We asked what kinds of areas they used most often.

11 60% 50% Areas Respondents Use Most Often 48% 40% 30% 20% 26% 26% 10% 0% Developed Undeveloped Both

12 Visitor Satisfaction How satisfied are CWM visitors with their visit?

13 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 87% CWM Visitors' Satisfaction 20% 10% 0% 11% 1% 0% 0% Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neither Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

14 What are people doing in the CWM? Hiking Downhill Skiing (Resort) Relaxing, hanging out Photography Escaping heat, noise, pollution

15 How long are people staying?

16 70% 66% Trip Length 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 4% Short trip under three hours 51% 30% 23% 15% 6% 4% About half the day The majority of the day Multiple days Dispersed Resort

17 What motivates people to visit the CWM? Observe scenic beauty Enjoy the sights and smells of nature For the adventure Experience peace and tranquility Improve physical health Be with friends enjoying activities

18 Out-Group Encounters Average number out-group encounters while recreating in the CWM: Dispersed Mean = people Resort Mean = 60 people

19 Out-Group Encounters How are these out-group encounters affecting people s experience?

20 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 68% Impact of Out-Group Encounters 25% 20% 10% 0% 7% Positively No Impact Negatively

21 Importance and Satisfaction Adequacy of signage Conditions of roads Scenery Condition of the natural environment Availability of parking Parking lot conditions Cleanliness of restrooms Conditions of developed facilities Conditions of forest trails Adequacy of signage of forest trails Feeling of safety Helpfulness of Forest Service personnel

22 Satisfaction Most satisfied: Scenery Helpfulness of FS personnel Feeling of safety Trail Conditions

23 Satisfaction Least satisfied: Availability of parking Parking lot conditions Cleanliness of restrooms Trail signage

24 Importance The three most important aspects of the CWM are: Scenery Environmental Conditions Trails

25 SATISFACTION AND IMPORTANCE MEAN SCORES Satisfaction and Importance 5 4 What do they value Satisfaction Importance

26 Three areas of concern Parking Environment Trails Transportation Natural Environment Recreation We have data!

27 Transportation Access fees Public transportation Bike access

28 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS Amount willing to pay for canyon access % Tri-Canyon users' willingness to pay for annual parking fee/vehicle pass 6% 8% 12% 21% 15% 10% Mean = $48.84 Median = $ % 6% % 3% 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% ANNUAL PARKING FEE/VEHICLE PASS AMOUNT

29 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS There should be more opportunities to use public transportation to access recreation areas in the Central Wasatch Public Transportation 24% % 11% 16% 14% 12% % 2% Strongly Disagree 1% 5% Neutral Strongly Agree

30 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS The Park-and-Ride transportation system should be expanded to have more pick-ups outside of the canyons 18% 17% Public Transportation 13% 14% 13% 18% % Strongly Disagree 1% 2% 3% Neutral Strongly Agree

31 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS Bicycle traffic 120 Road shoulders should be widened to increase bicycle safety 38% % 1% 2% 1% Strongly Disagree 8% 10% 12% 15% 12% Neutral Strongly Agree

32 Comments Large source of data Over 4,300 comments Neutral prompts: Forest Service and land managers General comments

33 What did we do with these comments? We read them Then we read them again Then we read them again Dominant themes Nvivo extract and organize the main themes that were present in the data.

34 Public Transportation Lots of support especially in the Cottonwoods! Both dispersed and developed users

35 Recreation More trails Trail maintenance (drainage, brushing, etc.) Better signage getting to trails at trailheads on trails Trail safety (mountain bikes/hikers/dogs)

36 Natural Environment Preservation Wilderness Protect Keep it wild Development Retrieved from:

37 Support: Trails Parking lots Public transportation Opposition: Housing/Hotels Ski area expansion Additional lifts Connections Development Continuum Development Threshold

38 Large-scale development Inter-resort connectivity (ONE Wasatch, Skilink, etc.) Housing development Commercial developments Resort expansion Separated into two categories Support Opposition

39 All CWM Respondents 81% 19% CWM Visitors for Development CWM Visitors Against Development

40 Summary Importance is higher than satisfaction Transportation Recreation Natural Environment Transportation Support for parking lot development and public transportation Recreation Support for additional trails, trail improvements, and trail signage Natural environment Support for protection and opposition to large-scale development

41 Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study Seasonal and Final Reports Available on the IORT website at: extension.usu.edu/iort

42 Questions? Retrieved from:

43 Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study Steven Burr, Ph.D. Recreation Resources Management Extension Specialist Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Chase C. Lamborn, M.S. Research Associate Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Department of Environment and Society Phone: College of Natural Resources Utah State University 125 W 200 S Moab, UT Office: (435) steve.burr@usu.edu Visit the IORT Website at extension.usu.edu/iort