1 / 58

State Park On-Site Visitor Survey

State Park On-Site Visitor Survey. Statewide Results 2002 - 2007. Acknowledgements. State Parks Consultation on survey design/implementation Data collection by state park staff Consumer Research/Marketing Services Branch Survey design and implementation

miakoda
Télécharger la présentation

State Park On-Site Visitor Survey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. State Park On-Site Visitor Survey Statewide Results 2002 - 2007

  2. Acknowledgements State Parks Consultation on survey design/implementation Data collection by state park staff Consumer Research/Marketing Services Branch Survey design and implementation Oversaw data collection and data analysis/reports Developed and distributed site reports Supervised data entry Gary Job Corp Students – data entry Sam Houston University, Dr. Michael Lau Statewide survey analysis and report Site reports for 16 parks

  3. Survey Purpose • Gain understanding of state park visitors to help plan for future statewide and regional marketing strategies and park business plans • First comprehensive survey of state park visitors on a site-specific and statewide basis • Previous research only during a specific season, at limited parks and sample sizes too small to analyze visitor information for each park (Duda, Spring 2001)

  4. Survey Topics • Visitor Demographics • Visitation and Travel Patterns • Recreation Participation and Facility Use • Satisfaction with Facilities and Programs

  5. Survey Methodology • Survey conducted on-site at 70 state parks • Survey distribution waves: 1st wave: Nov 2002 – Oct 2003 2nd wave: June 2004 – May 2005 3rd wave: Sept 2006 – Aug 2007

  6. Survey Methodology • Goal for each park was to complete 800 surveys for the year • 200 surveys per season (60 survey per week) • Simple random sampling procedures • Random sampling procedures explained to park staff • Distribution based on proportions reported by visitation estimates • Distribution to day/overnight and weekend/weekday visitors • Monthly follow-ups with staff to track distribution and encourage random sampling • Spanish language surveys provided at parks where manager felt there was a need • SP staff facilitated survey returns: • Survey drop boxes at park gate • Incentives provided at some parks • Reminded visitors to complete the survey • Reminded visitors they could also mail in survey

  7. Survey Response • Overall response rate: 24% 26,825 Returns / 112,486 Distributed • Total surveys returned by season: Winter (Dec – Feb) 4,861 Spring (Mar – May) 8,392 Summer (Jun – Aug) 6,083 Fall (Sep – Nov) 7,446 Total 26,825

  8. Survey Response • Survey returns by park ranged from 100 – 1,352 • Response rates 10% - 69% • Reasons for below target distribution at some parks • Low visitation in off-season hindered distribution at some parks • 67 parks received site reports • 22 Seasonal reports • 45 Annual reports (less than 30 returns per season)

  9. Non-Response Bias Test • Non-response bias may occur when respondents are systematically different from those who do not respond • Non-response test was conducted • Test non-response survey at 3 parks • Tested key variables for non-response bias: • Total days/nights, first-time/repeat visits, overall satisfaction, State Parks Pass membership, age and ethnicity • Found the effect of non-response bias was minimal

  10. Weighting the Survey • Weighting ensures that the sample represents the correct proportions of visitors based on FY07 visitation estimates • Survey weighted by day/overnight visitation and by season • Weighting also based on total visits at all parks • Based on state park visitation estimates (FY07) • Larger parks with a greater number of visitors are represented in the sample accordingly

  11. What did 27,000 visitors tell us about Texas State Parks?

  12. Who are our park visitors?

  13. Age of Visitors • Park visitors are older (average age 47) than average Texan (43) • Overnight visitors (51.4) are older than day visitors (47.2) • More overnight visitors are 55 + (44%) than day visitors (32%) • Age does not vary much by season – slightly higher in the fall WinterSpringSummerFall Average Age 47.0 47.1 46.8 48.4 Age 55+ 31% 32% 30% 35%

  14. Household Income • Park visitors earn higher median household incomes than average Texan Park Visitors $60,000 - $79,999 Texan $40,000 • 20% of visitors with annual household income over $100,000 (compared to 11% of TX population) Under $40,000 24% $40,000 - $59,999 23% $60,000 - $79,999 19% $80,000 - $99,999 14% $100,000 or more 20% • There is little variation between day/overnight visitors and by season

  15. Ethnicity State Park Visitor Resident Texan • Vast majority of resident Texan park visitors are white/non-Hispanic, compared to about half of Texans Source: US Census, 2010 projected population • No differences in ethnicity by season • Overnight (91%) more likely to be white/non-Hispanic than day visitors (84%)

  16. Parks with Highest Percent of Hispanic Visitors % Hispanic % Hispanic Park Visitorsin County * Lake Casa Blanca 83% 90% Falcon 70% 75% Lake Corpus Christi 51% 40% Franklin Mountains 35% 75% Garner 27% 60% Choke Canyon 27% 40% Seminole Canyon 20% 40% Balmorhea 19% 60% Goliad 16% 40% Source: US Census, 2000

  17. Place of Residence • The majority of visitors are Texas residents (88%); 12% came from out-of-state • Out-of-state visitors come to parks the most during the winter • Out-of-state visitors more likely to be overnight visitors (17%) than • day visitors (11%)

  18. Urban vs. Rural • Park visitors are slightly more likely to be from rural areas compared to the average Texan • Park Visitors 23% Rural / 77% Urban • Texan 15% Rural / 85% Urban • Fall visitors are more likely to live in urban areas compared to the other seasons • No variation in the urban/rural residence for day and overnight visitors

  19. Park Visitation Patterns

  20. First-Time vs. Repeat Visits(at specific park where visitors were surveyed) • 42% of visitors came to park for the first-time (58% repeat visits) - No difference between day and overnight visitors • Slightly more repeat visitors come to the park during the fall season • Repeat visitors: Fall (61%); Winter (57%); Spring (56%); Summer (57%)

  21. Type of Payment to Enter Park • The majority of visitors paid the per-person price • Nearly one-third used the State Parks Pass • Overnight more likely to use SP Pass

  22. Number of Nights/Days Spent at Park • Day visitors average 3.1 days per year • Over one-half visited for only one day • Overnight visitors average 3.6 nights per year • One-half of overnight visitors spent 3 or more nights • Little variation by season

  23. Length of Current Park Visit Overnight Visitors • Two-thirds of visitors stayed 2 or less nights for their current visit • Over one-third stayed at the park 3 or more nights • There was little variation by season

  24. Visits to Other State Parks or Historic Sites • In addition to the park currently visited, the majority (61%) visited another state park or historic site in the last year • More overnight than day visitors visited other parks • There was no variation by season

  25. Time Traveled to Park • One-half of day visitors traveled one hour or less • More than half (62%) of overnight visitors traveled 2 hours or more • There was little variation in travel time by season

  26. Local vs. Non-Local Visits • Most visitors to park are non-local (live 50 or more miles from the park) • Overnight visitors are more likely to be non-local than day visitors

  27. How do park visitors contribute to local economy?

  28. Primary Destination of Trip • For most visitors (66%) the park is the primary destination of their trip • Overnight more likely to name park as primary destination • Fall visitors most likely to visit park as primary destination and winter least likely • Fall (71%); Winter (60%); Spring (66%); Summer (67%)

  29. Day Visitors Staying Overnight in Local Area • One-third of day visitors stay overnight in the local area Day Visitors Reside locally 42% Stay overnight in local area 29% Stay overnight in non-local area 29%

  30. Visits to Local Area Attractions • One-third visited attractions in the local area • More overnight users visited local attractions • No variation by season

  31. Park-Specific Survey Data

  32. Who do visitors come to the park with?

  33. Who Visitors Came to Park With • Most visitors came to the park with family/spouse • More overnight visitors came with family/spouse • Visits with family most likely in spring and summer • Winter (65%); Spring (74%); Summer (77%); Fall (68%)

  34. Party Composition • Two-thirds of visitors came to park with adults only (no children in party) • Slight variation between day and overnight visitors • Visitors without children come more during winter and fall • Fall (73%); Winter (76%); Spring (62%); Summer (57%)

  35. Party Size • Average party size 2.5 • 60% with parties of 2 or less people • Party size relatively consistent between day and overnight visitors • Party size highest in the summer • Winter (2.3); Spring (2.6); Summer (2.7); Fall (2.4)

  36. What influences visitors to come to state parks?

  37. Sources that Influence Park Visits • Word of mouth and previous visit most common sources of influence • One-quarter of visitors were influenced by TPWD communication efforts (Website, SP Guide, Magazine, PBS show) • Website and State Park Guide very important for overnight visitors

  38. Sources that Influence the Park VisitFirst-Time vs. Repeat Visitors • Word of mouth, website and State Park Guide more important for first-time visitors

  39. Reason for Visit andRecreation Activity Participation

  40. Primary Reason for Visiting Park“Top of Mind” • Overnight Visitors: Camp; Relax/get away • Day Visitors: Sightseeing/scenery; Hike/walk trails

  41. Recreation Activity Participation • Hiking was the top activity for all • Hiking occurs more during winter and fall • Winter (21%); Fall (20%); Spring (18%); Summer (15%) • Day visitors more likely to sightsee and picnic * Percentages based on total survey population. Some parks may not offer all activities listed.

  42. Amenities Used at the Park • Trails were used the most • Trails and picnic areas used more by day visitors * Percentages based on total survey population. Some parks may not offer all the amenities listed.

  43. Park Improvements Most Desired • Day visitors: Trail improvements; More interpretive programs • Overnight visitors: Campsite and restroom/shower improvements; • More interpretive programs

  44. Are park visitors satisfied?

  45. Visitor Satisfaction • Overwhelming majority satisfied with park visit (94%) • However only two-thirds “very satisfied” • No difference between overnight/day visitors or by season

  46. Visitor Satisfaction and Likelihood to Return to the Park • The degree of satisfaction has an important impact on repeat visitation • 92% “very satisfied” visitors are likely to return • 80% “satisfied” visitors likely to return • 25% “somewhat satisfied/dissatisfied” visitors are unlikely to return

  47. Reasons for Dissatisfaction Top reasons for dissatisfaction DayOvernight Shower/Restroom Improvements 14% 21% Campsite Improvements 8% 14% Trail Improvements (more trails, signage/maps) 9% 5% General site maintenance 8% 8% Issues related to fees 3% 3%

  48. Recommendations & FY ’11 Action Items

  49. Engage More Families Conclusion: Demographics of visitors indicate need to engage more families with children Action: Promote family-oriented programs and benefits • Encourage through increased promotion of Outdoor Family, Free Fishing; Go Fish • Emphasize free entry for children under 13 in marketing materials and on website • Develop “Family Fun” campaign for both general market and Hispanics • Consider grandparent/grandchildren targeted activities, programs and promotions • Develop family itineraries to include on new website and in Getaways e-newsletter • Partner with businesses to implement family-oriented promotions

More Related