Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2014 05 14

Home Browse Search

Analysis of Variance r Sampling took place in three different types of parks Initially it was thought there might be differences among the parks One -way ANOVA conducted on the data Results revealed no substantive differences across the three parks, therefore all data treated as one sample Key Findings There was high perceived effectiveness of Leave No Trace, and medium to high levels of self - described knowledge Respondents hold favorable attitudes towards recommended practices, and feel that practicing Leave Na Trace is not difficult r Attitudes and beliefs about Leave No Trace are important concepts in the context of "leave what you find ", "dispose of waste properly" and "respect wildlife" r Overall, results indicate that perceived effectiveness is a significant predictor of future Leave No Trace behavioral intent 5/5/2014 Descriptive Results s, 47% of the sample included Wyoming residents - the remainder of the sample were from states such as CO. ID. NE, etc. t• 58% of the s,unple were male Visitation: 29 %- I" time visitors. 35 % -- 7.5 visits. 23 %- -1t) visits in past 12 months Primary purpose of visit: i Camping(29%) • Fishing (21 %) ✓ Visiting historical exhibits(ln %) Yo, Sightsecing(tI %) • Mountain biking(1O%) r Boating (5%) Hiking(4 %) Management Implications • Visitors need to understand that resource degradation is occurring, how it is caused and need to know hew it can be minimized or avoided ✓ Visitors need to understand achy they are being asked to practice Leave No Trace and how it benefits the resource • When visitors understand how recommended practices are effective, they are more Rely to practice Leave No Trace i Both land managers and the Center should focus educational efforts on the cause of impacts and the effectiveness of recommended practices 9