National Visitor Use Monitoring Results

 

 

June 2004

 

USDA Forest Service

Region 5

 

 

SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prepared by:

 

Susan M. Kocis

Donald B.K. English

Stanley J. Zarnoch

Ross Arnold

Larry Warren


Catherine Ruka

 

 


Table of Contents

 

 

INTRODUCTION.. 2

Scope and purpose of the National Visitor Use Monitoring project 2

Definition of Terms. 3

CHAPTER 1:  SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION.. 4

The NVUM Process and Definition of Terms. 4

Constraints on Uses of the Results. 5

The Forest Stratification Results. 6

Table 1.  Population of available site days for sampling and percentage of days sampled by stratum on the San Bernardino National Forest 6

CHAPTER 2:  VISITATION ESTIMATES. 7

Visitor Use Estimates. 7

Table 2.  Annual San Bernardino National Forest recreation use estimate. 7

Table 3.  Number of last-exiting recreation visitors on San Bernardino NF by site type and form type 1/ 8

Description of Visitors. 8

Table 4.  Gender distribution of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors. 8

Table 5.  Age distribution of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors. 8

Table 6.  Race/ethnicity of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors. 9

Table 7.  Most common zip codes of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors. 10

Average number of people per vehicle and average axle count per vehicle in survey. 10

CHAPTER 3:  WILDERNESS VISITORS. 11

Table 8.  Age distribution of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors. 11

Table 9.  Race/ethnicity of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors. 11

Table 10.  Most common zip codes of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors. 12

Table 11.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF Wilderness Visitors. 13

CHAPTER 4:  DESCRIPTION OF THE VISIT. 14

Table 12.  Site visit length of stay (in hours) by site/type on San Bernardino NF. 14

Table 13.  San Bernardino NF activity participation and primary activity. 15

Use of constructed facilities and designated areas. 16

Table 14.  Percentage use of facilities and specially designated areas on San Bernardino NF. 16

Economic Information. 17

This trip away from home. 17

Table 15.  Substitute behavior choices of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors. 17

Average annual outdoor recreation activity. 17

Table 16.  Annual recreation spending for visitors to the San Bernardino NF. 18

Visitor Satisfaction Information. 18

Table 17.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors at Developed Day Use sites. 19

Table 18.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors at Developed Overnight sites. 20

Table 19.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors in General Forest Areas. 21

Crowding. 22

Table 20.  Perception of crowding by San Bernardino NF recreation visitors by site type (percent site visits) 22

Other comments from visitors. 23

Table 21.  List of comments received from San Bernadino NF recreation visitors. 23



INTRODUCTION             

Scope and purpose of the National Visitor Use Monitoring project

 

The National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) project was implemented as a response to the need to better understand the use and importance of and satisfaction with national forest system recreation opportunities.  This level of understanding is required by national forest plans, Executive Order 12862 (Setting Customer Service Standards), and implementation of the National Recreation Agenda.  To improve public service, the agency’s Strategic and Annual Performance Plans require measuring trends in user satisfaction and use levels.  It will assist Congress, Forest Service leaders, and program managers in making sound decisions that best serve the public and protect valuable natural resources by providing science based, reliable information about the type, quantity, quality and location of recreation use on public lands.  The information collected is also important to external customers including state agencies and private industry.  NVUM methodology and analysis is explained in detail in the research paper entitled: Forest Service National Visitor Use Monitoring Process: Research Method Documentation; English, Kocis, Zarnoch, and Arnold; Southern Research Station; May 2002 (http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum).

 

In conjunction with guidelines and recommendations from the Outdoor Recreation Review Commission, the USDA-Forest Service has estimated recreation use and maintained records since the 1950s.  Many publications on preferred techniques for estimating recreation use at developed and dispersed recreation sites were sponsored by Forest Service Research Stations and Universities.  Implementation of these recommended methodologies takes specific skills, a dedicated work force, and strict adherence to an appropriate sampling plan.  The earliest estimates were designed to estimate use at developed fee recreation facilities such as campgrounds.  These estimates have always been fairly reliable because they are based upon readily observable, objective counts of items such as a fee envelope. 

 

Prior to the mid-1990s, the Forest Service used its Recreation Information Management (RIM) system to store and analyze recreation use information.  Forest managers often found they lacked the resources to simultaneously manage the recreation facilities and monitor visitor use following the established protocols.  In 1996, the RIM monitoring protocols were no longer required to be used. 

 

In 1998 a group of research and forest staff were appointed to investigate and pilot a recreation sampling system that would be cost effective and provide statistical recreation use information at the forest, regional, and national level.  Since that time, a permanent sampling system (NVUM) has been developed.  Several Forest Service staff areas including Recreation, Wilderness, Ecosystem Management, Research and Strategic Planning and Resource Assessment are involved in implementing the program.  A four-year timeframe of data collection was established for the first sampling cycle, and a five-year timeframe for succeeding cycles.  The first sampling cycle was completed in September 2003.  The second sampling cycle begins October 2004.  This ongoing monitoring effort will provide quality recreation information needed for improving citizen centered recreation services.

 

This data can be very useful for forest planning and decision making.  The information provided can be used in economic efficiency analysis that requires providing a value per National Forest Visit.  This can then be compared to other resource values.  The description of visitor characteristics (age, race, zip code, activity participation) can help the forest identify the type of recreation niche they fill.  The satisfaction information can help management decide where best to place limited resources that would result in improved visitor satisfaction.  The economic expenditure information can help forests show local communities the employment and income effects of tourism from forest visitors.  In addition, the credible use statistics can be helpful in considering visitor capacity issues.

Definition of Terms

 

NVUM has standardized definitions of visitor use measurement to ensure that all national forest visitor measurements are comparable.  These definitions are basically the same as established by the Forest Service since the 1970s, however the application of the definition is stricter.  Visitors must pursue a recreation activity physically located “on” Forest Service managed land in order to be counted.  They cannot be passing through; viewing from non-Forest Service managed roads, or just using restroom facilities.  The NVUM basic use measurements are national forest visits and site visits.   Along with these use measurements basic statistics, which indicate the precision of the estimate, are given.  These statistics include the error rate and associated confidence intervals at the 80 percent confidence level.   The definitions of these terms follow.

 

 National forest visit - the entry of one person upon a national forest to participate in recreation activities for an unspecified period of time.  A national forest visit can be composed of multiple site visits.

 

Site visit - the entry of one person onto a national forest site or area to participate in recreation activities for an unspecified period of time.

 

Recreation trip the duration of time beginning when the visitor left their home and ending when they got back to their home.

 

Confidence level  -- defines the degree of certainty that a range of values contains the true value of what is being estimated.  For example, an 80% confidence level refers to the range of values within which the true value will fall 80% of the time.  Higher confidence levels necessarily cover a larger range of values.

 

Confidence interval width (also called error rate) - these terms define the reliability of the visit estimates.  The confidence level defines the desired level of certainty.  The size of the interval that is needed to reach that level of certainty is the confidence interval width.  The confidence interval width is expressed as a percent of the estimate and defines the upper and lower bounds of the confidence interval.  The smaller the confidence interval, the more precise is the estimate.  An 80 percent confidence level is very acceptable for social science applications at a broad national or forest scale.    For example:  There are 205 million national forest visits plus or minus 3 percent at the 80 percent confidence level.  In other words we are 80 percent certain that the true number of national forest visits lies between 198.85 million and 211.15 million.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

CHAPTER 1:  SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

The NVUM Process and Definition of Terms

 

To participate in the NVUM process, forests first categorized all recreation sites and areas into five basic categories called “site types”:  Day Use Developed Sites (DUDS), Overnight Use Developed Sites (OUDS), Wilderness, General Forest Areas (GFA), and View Corridors (VC).  Only the first four categories are considered “true” national forest visits and were included in the estimate provided.  Within these broad categories (called site types) every open day of the year for each site/area was rated as high, medium or low last exiting recreation use.  Sites/areas that are scheduled to be closed or would have “0” use were also identified.  Each day on which a site or area is open is called a site day and is the basic sampling unit for the survey.  Results of this forest categorization are shown in Table 1.  

 

A map showing all General Forest Exit locations and View Corridors was prepared and archived with the NVUM data for use in future sample years.  NVUM also provided training materials, equipment, survey forms, funding, and the protocol necessary for the forest to gather visitor use information.

 

NVUM terms used in the site categorization framework are defined below:

 

Site day - a day that a recreation site or area is open to the public for recreation purposes.

 

Site types -- stratification of a forest recreation site or area into one of five broad categories as defined in the paper: Forest Service National Visitor Use Monitoring Process: Research Method Documentation, May 2002, English et al.  The categories are Day Use Developed sites (DUDS), Overnight Use Developed Sites (OUDS), General Forest Areas (GFA), Wilderness (WILD), and View Corridors (VC).  Another category called Off-Forest Recreation Activities (OFRA) was categorized but not sampled. 

 

Proxy – information collected at a recreation site or area that is related to the amount of recreation visitation received.  The proxy information must pertain to all users of the site, it must be an exact tally of use and it must be one of the proxy types allowed in the NVUM pre-work directions (fee receipts, fee envelopes, mandatory permits, permanent traffic counters, ticket sales, and daily use records).

 

Nonproxy – a recreation site or area that does not have proxy information.  At these sites a 24-hour traffic count is taken to measure total use for one site day at the sample site.

 

Use level strata - for either proxy or nonproxy sites, each day that a recreation site or area was open for recreation, the site day was categorized as either high, medium or low last exiting recreation traffic, or closed.  Closed was defined as either administratively closed or “0” use.  For example Sabino Picnic Area (a DUDS nonproxy site) is closed for 120 days, has high last exiting recreation use on open weekends (70 days) and medium last exiting recreation use on open midweek days (175 days).  This accounts for all 365 days of the year at Sabino Picnic area.  This process was repeated for every developed site and area on the forest.   

 

 

Constraints on Uses of the Results

 

The information presented here is valid and applicable at the forest level.  It is not designed to be accurate at the district or site level.  The quality of the visitation estimate is dependent on the preliminary sample design development, sampling unit selection, sample size and variability, and survey implementation.  First, preliminary work conducted by forests to classify sites consistently according to the type and amount of visitation influences the quality of the estimate.  Second, visitors sampled must be representative of the population of all visitors.  Third, the number of visitors sampled must be large enough to adequately control variability.  Finally, the success of the forest in accomplishing its assigned sample days, correctly filling out the interview forms, and following the sample protocol influence the error rate.  The error rate will reflect all these factors.  The smaller the error rate, the better the estimate.  Interviewer error in asking the questions is not necessarily reflected in this error rate.

 

Large error rates (i.e. high variability) in the national forest visit (NFV), site visit (SV) and Wilderness visit estimates is primarily caused by a small sample size in a given stratum (for example General Forest Area low use days) where the use observed was beyond that stratum’s normal range.  For example, on the Clearwater National Forest in the General Forest Area low stratum, there were 14 sample days.  Of these 14 sample days, 13 days had visitation estimates between 0-20.  One observation had a visitation estimate of 440.  Therefore, the stratum mean was about 37 with a standard error of 116.  The 80% confidence interval width is then 400% of the mean, a very high error rate (variability).   Whether these types of odd observations are due to unusual weather, malfunctioning traffic counters, or a misclassification of the day (a sampled low use day that should have been categorized as a high use day) is unknown.  Eliminating the unusual observation from data analyis could reduce the error rate.  However, the NVUM team had no reason to suspect the data was incorrect and did not eliminate these unusual cases.  

 

The descriptive information about national forest visitors is based upon only those visitors that were interviewed.  If a forest has distinct seasonal use patterns and activities that vary greatly by season, these patterns may or may not be adequately captured in this study.  This study was designed to estimate total number of people during a year.  Sample days were distributed based upon high, medium, and low exiting use days, not seasons.  When applying these results in forest analysis, items such as activity participation should be carefully scrutinized.  For example, although the Routt National Forest had over 1 million skier visits, no sample days occurred during the main ski season; they occurred at the ski area but during their high use summer season.  Therefore, activity participation based upon interviews did not adequately capture downhill skiers.  This particular issue was adjusted.  However, the same issue- seasonal use patterns- may still occur to a lesser degree on other forests.   Future sample design will attempt to incorporate seasonal variation in use. 

Some forest visitors were counted and included in the total forest use estimate but were not surveyed.  This included visitors to recreation special events and organization camps. 

 


The Forest Stratification Results

 

The results of the recreation site/area stratification and sample days accomplished by this forest are displayed in Table 1.  This table describes the population of available site days open for sampling based on forest pre-work completed prior to the actual surveys.  Every site and area on the forest was categorized as high, medium, low, or closed last exiting recreation use.  This stratification was then used to randomly select sampling days for this forest.  The project methods paper listed on page one describes the sampling process and sample allocation formulas in detail.  Basically, at least eight sample days per stratum are randomly selected for sampling and more days are added if the stratum is very large.  Also displayed on the table is the percentage of sample days per stratum accomplished by the forest. 

 

Table 1.  Population of available site days for sampling and percentage of days sampled by stratum on the San Bernardino National Forest

 

Site type

TYPE

SAMPLING STRATUM

# DAYS SAMPLED

# DAYS IN POPULATION

SAMPLING RATE

DUDS

NONPROXY

HIGH

19

519

3.66

DUDS

NONPROXY

MEDIUM

21

1,106

1.90

DUDS

NONPROXY

LOW

13

2,502

0.52

DUDS

PROXY

FE3

4

255

1.57

DUDS

PROXY

FR1

5

247

2.02

DUDS

PROXY

PTC1

4

363

1.10

DUDS

PROXY

SV1

6

573

1.05

GFA

NONPROXY

HIGH

21

325

6.46

GFA

NONPROXY

MEDIUM

38

1,721

2.21

GFA

NONPROXY

LOW

24

8,628

0.28

OUDS

NONPROXY

HIGH

3

95

3.16

OUDS

NONPROXY

MEDIUM

1

264

0.38

OUDS

NONPROXY

LOW

11

2,400

0.46

OUDS

PROXY

DUR4

1

1,616

0.06

OUDS

PROXY

DUR5

1

291

0.34

OUDS

PROXY

FE4

0

113

0.00

OUDS

PROXY

RE2

4

91

4.40

WILDERNESS

NONPROXY

HIGH

14

127

11.02

WILDERNESS

NONPROXY

MEDIUM

18

498

3.61

WILDERNESS

NONPROXY

LOW

11

802

1.37


CHAPTER 2:  VISITATION ESTIMATES

Visitor Use Estimates

 

Visitor use estimates are available at the national, regional, and forest level.  Only forest level data is provided here.  For national and regional reports visit the following web site: (http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum).

 

                     Table 2.  Annual San Bernardino National Forest recreation use estimate

 

VISIT TYPE

VISITS

80 % CONFIDENCE INTERVAL

SITE VISITS

2,321,765

7.6

NATL FOREST VISITS

1,953,634

7.9

WILDERNESS VISITS

87,509

40.8

 

 

The San Bernardino National Forest participated in the National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) project from October 2002 through September 2003.  The forest coordinator was Bob Wood.  The forest coordinator reported that large portions of the forest were closed in the fall of 2002 due to hazardous fire conditions.  The first thirteen out of twenty four survey sites in October and November 2002 had no use because of fire closures.  Fire closures were in effect from October 4 through November 10 2002.  The media continued to carry many warnings about hazards in the area after the fire closure was lifted and visitors may have stayed away.  Organizational camps on the forest reported a 10% drop in use.

 

Recreation use on the forest for fiscal year 2003 was 1,953,634 national forest visits.  The 80 percent confidence interval width was +/- 7.9 percent.  There were 2,321,765 site visits, an average of 1.19 site visits per national forest visit.  Included in the site visit estimate are 87,509 Wilderness visits.

 

A total of 1,826 visitors were contacted on the forest during the sample year.  Of these, 23.2 percent refused to be interviewed.  Of the 1,403 people who agreed to be interviewed, 22.6 percent were not recreating, including 3.7 percent who just stopped to use the bathroom, 2 percent were working, 12.5 percent were just passing through, and 4.4 percent had some other reason to be there.  About 77.4 percent of those interviewed said their primary purpose on the forest was recreation and 91.8 percent of them were exiting for the last time.  Of the visitors leaving the forest agreeing to be interviewed, about 86 percent were last exiting recreation visitors (the target interview population).  Table 3 displays the number of last-exiting recreation visitors interviewed at each site type and the type of interview form they answered.


 

Table 3.  Number of last-exiting recreation visitors on San Bernardino NF by site type and form type 1/

 

FORM TYPE

DEVELOPED DAY USE

DEVELOPED OVERNIGHT

GENERAL FOREST AREA

WILDERNESS

BASIC

172

17

125

71

ECON

136

11

114

57

SATIS

121

9

107

57

 

1/  Form type means the type of interview form administered to the visitor.  The basic form did not ask either economic or satisfaction questions.  The Satisfaction form did not ask economic questions and the economic form did not ask satisfaction questions. 

     Description of Visitors

 

Descriptions of forest visitors were developed based upon the characteristics of interviewed visitors and expanding to the national forest visitor population.  Tables 4 and 5 display the gender and age distributions for national forest visits.

 

                Table 4.  Gender distribution of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors

 

MALE

FEMALE

66.1

33.9

 

                 Table 5.  Age distribution of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors

 

AGECLASS

PERCENT

UNDER 16

24.76

16 TO 19

5.24

20 TO 29

15.10

30 TO 39

22.77

40 TO 49

16.33

50 TO 59

7.88

60 TO 69

5.76

70 PLUS

2.17

 

 


Visitors categorized themselves into one of seven race/ethnicity categories.  Table 6 gives a detailed breakout by category.

 

                   Table 6.  Race/ethnicity of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors

 

WHITE

HISPANIC OR LATINO

NATIVE AMERICAN

AFRICAN AMERICAN

ASIAN

PACIFIC ISLANDER

OTHER

70.8

19.8

1.1

0.9

6.1

1.7

1.3

 

 

Slightly more than two percent (2.3%) of forest visitors were from another country.  The survey did not collect country affiliation.  The most common visitor zip codes are shown in Table 7.  Additional zip code information was collected and is available upon request.  This information can help identify the forest visitor market area.    

 


 

 

    Table 7.  Most common zip codes of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors

 

ZIPCODE

COUNT

PERCENT

92373

19

2.12766

92376

19

2.12766

92335

18

2.01568

92507

15

1.67973

92374

14

1.56775

92399

13

1.45577

92407

11

1.23180

92544

11

1.23180

91720

10

1.11982

92240

10

1.11982

92314

10

1.11982

92315

10

1.11982

92404

10

1.11982

92882

10

1.11982

91701

9

1.00784

92260

8

0.89586

92336

8

0.89586

92346

8

0.89586

92382

8

0.89586

92549

8

0.89586

 

 

 

Average number of people per vehicle and average axle count per vehicle in survey

 

There was an average of 2.82 people per vehicle with an average of 2 axles per vehicle.  This information in conjunction with traffic counts was used to expand observations from individual interviews to the full forest population of recreation visitors.  This information may be useful to forest engineers and others who use vehicle counters to conduct traffic studies. 


CHAPTER 3:  WILDERNESS VISITORS

 

Several questions on the NVUM survey form dealt directly with use of designated Wilderness.  Wilderness was sampled 43 days on the forest, and 185 interviews were obtained.  There were 52.6 percent male and 47.4 percent female visitors to Wilderness on the forest.  Tables 8 and 9 display the age distribution and race/ethnicity of Wilderness visitors.  

 

                  Table 8.  Age distribution of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors

 


AGECLASS

PERCENT

UNDER 16

21.52

16 TO 19

0.34

20 TO 29

9.09

30 TO 39

15.53

40 TO 49

29.77

50 TO 59

12.72

60 TO 69

5.12

70 PLUS

5.92

 

 

                    Table 9.  Race/ethnicity of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors

 

WHITE

HISPANIC OR LATINO

NATIVE AMERICAN

AFRICAN AMERICAN

ASIAN

PACIFIC ISLANDER

OTHER

88.1

6.9

0.0

0.0

5.7

0.2

0.0

 

 

The Wilderness visitors were from a wide variety of zip codes.  The most common Wilderness visitor zip codes are shown in Table 10.  Additional zip code information is available upon request.

 


                         Table 10.  Most common zip codes of San Bernardino NF Wilderness visitors

 

WLDZIP

COUNT

PERCENT

92373

7

3.82514

92374

7

3.82514

92339

5

2.73224

92549

5

2.73224

92399

3

1.63934

92404

3

1.63934

92507

3

1.63934

92646

3

1.63934

90066

2

1.09290

90505

2

1.09290

91750

2

1.09290

92024

2

1.09290

92028

2

1.09290

92037

2

1.09290

92118

2

1.09290

92129

2

1.09290

92240

2

1.09290

92260

2

1.09290

92305

2

1.09290

92335

2

1.09290

92346

2

1.09290

92354

2

1.09290

92503

2

1.09290

92562

2

1.09290

92591

2

1.09290

92592

2

1.09290

 

The average length of stay in Wilderness on the forest was 7.9 hours.  In addition, all visitors were asked on how many different days they entered into designated Wilderness during their national forest visit even if we interviewed them at a developed recreation site or general forest area. Of those visitors who did enter designated Wilderness, they entered 1.28 different days.

 

None of those interviewed in Wilderness said they used the services of a commercial guide. 

 

Table 11 gives detailed information about how the Wilderness visitors rated various aspects of the area.  A general example of how to interpret this information: If the visitors had rated the importance of the adequacy of signage a 5.0 (very important) and they rated their satisfaction with the adequacy of signage a 3.0 (somewhat satisfied) then the forest might be able to increase visitor satisfaction.  Perhaps twenty-nine percent of visitors said the adequacy of signage was poor.  The forest could target improving this sector of visitors for increased satisfaction by improving the signage for Wilderness. 

 

Wilderness visitors on the average rated their visit 4.0 (on a scale from 1 to 10) concerning crowding, meaning they felt there were few people there.  Less than one percent said the area they visited was overcrowded (a 10 on the scale) and 73.5 percent said there was hardly anyone there (a 1 on the scale).

 

 

Table 11.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF Wilderness Visitors.

 

ITEM

Poor

Fair

Average

Good

Very Good

Average Rating

*

Mean Importance

**

N obs

Restroom cleanliness

2.3

0.0

34.3

40.7

22.7

3.8

4.1

32

Developed facility condition

0.0

0.0

5.0

24.6

70.4

4.7

3.7

23

Condition of environment

2.0

2.0

1.0

20.0

75.0

4.6

4.7

56

Employee helpfulness

0.0

0.9

5.2

52.7

41.2

4.3

4.0

20

Interpretive display

0.0

4.0

4.2

59.2

32.5

4.2

4.1

11

Parking availability

5.1

2.3

6.5

38.3

47.8

4.2

4.2

56

Parking lot condition

24.6

0.0

6.3

29.2

40.0

3.6

3.3

55

Rec. info. available

2.8

2.9

13.8

27.6

52.9

4.2

3.6

42

Road condition

0.0

0.0

3.8

49.8

46.4

4.4

3.8

50

Feeling of safety

0.0

1.9

0.0

28.2

69.8

4.7

4.8

57

Scenery

0.0

0.0

0.5

22.8

76.7

4.8

4.8

57

Signage adequacy

0.0

1.1

37.4

35.3

26.2

3.9

3.6

52

Trail condition

0.0

0.0

0.5

47.2

52.3

4.5

4.4

57

Value for fee paid

20.3

0.7

1.4

42.2

35.3

3.7

3.7

45

*Scale is: Poor = 1   Fair = 2   Average = 3   Good = 4   Very Good = 5

** Scale is: 1= not important   2= somewhat important   3=moderately important   4= important    5 = very important

N obs means the number of visitors who responded to this item.

Note: For items with less than 10 responses the data was not reported

 

 

 

 


 

CHAPTER 4:  DESCRIPTION OF THE VISIT

 

A description of visitor activity during their national forest visit was developed.  This basic information includes participation in various recreation activities, length of stay on the national forest and at recreation sites, visitor satisfaction with national forest facilities and services, and economic expenditures. 

 

The average length of stay on this forest for a national forest visit was 17.6 hours.  Over 16 percent (16.08%) of visitors stayed overnight on the forest.  

 

In addition, visitors reported how much time they spent on the specific recreation site at which they were interviewed.   Average time spent varied considerably by site and is displayed in Table 12.  

 

Table 12.  Site visit length of stay (in hours) by site/type on San Bernardino NF

 

Site Visit Average

Developed Day Use

Developed Overnight Use

General Forest Area

Wilderness

National Forest Visit

6.9

3.5

43.0

3.8

7.9

17.6

 

The average recreation visitor went to 1.19 sites during their national forest visit.  Forest visitors sometimes go to just one national forest site or area during their visit.  For example, downhill skiers may just go the ski area and nowhere else.  89.6 percent of visitors went only to the site at which they were interviewed.

 

During their visit to the forest, the top five recreation activities of the visitors were hiking/walking, relaxing, viewing natural features, downhill skiing, and viewing wildlife (see Table 13).  Each visitor also picked one of these activities as their primary activity for their current recreation visit to the forest.  The top primary activities were downhill skiing, hiking/walking, relaxing, bicycling, and picnicking (see Table 13).   Please note that the results of the NVUM activity analysis DO NOT identify the types of activities visitors would like to have offered on the national forests.  It also does not tell us about displaced forest visitors, those who no longer visit the forest because the activities they desire are not offered. 


 

                  Table 13.  San Bernardino NF activity participation and primary activity

 

Activity

% Participating

% as Main Activity

Developed Camping

9.80

4.14

Primitive Camping

2.33

1.65

Backpacking

3.31

0.84

Resort Use

13.96

0.37

Picnicking

18.20

4.24

Viewing Natural Features

41.10

3.72

Visiting Historic Sites

3.43

0.00

Nature Center Activities

10.48

2.47

Nature Study

7.05

0.14

Relaxing

45.54

11.62

Fishing

2.65

1.63

Hunting

0.43

0.07

OHV Use

6.70

3.78

Driving for Pleasure

16.92

1.45

Snowmobiling

0.00

0.00

Motorized Water Activities

0.29

0.01

Other Motorized Activity

0.60

0.46

Hiking / Walking

47.16

24.45

Horesback Riding

1.19

0.05

Bicycling

6.87

4.80

Non-motorized Water

0.22

0.09

Downhill Skiing

32.58

32.47

Cross-country Skiing

0.35

0.11

Other Non-motorized

4.97

2.53

Gathering Forest Products

1.82

0.00

Viewing Wildlife

31.00

0.73

                 Note: this column may total more than 100% because some visitors chose more than one primary activity.


Use of constructed facilities and designated areas

 

One third of the last exiting recreation visitors interviewed were asked about the types of constructed facilities and special designated areas they used during their visit.  The five most used facilities/areas were: downhill ski area, forest trails, picnic area, developed campground, and scenic byway. Table 14 provides a summary of reported facility and special area use. 

 

 

 

Table 14.  Percentage use of facilities and specially designated areas on San Bernardino NF.

 

FACILITY

PERCENT

Developed Campground

10.25

Developed Swimming Site

1.12

Forest Trails

31.53

Scenic Byway

10.97

Wilderness

8.06

Museum

7.72

Picnic Area

17.39

Boat Launch

0.19

Designated OHV Area

1.46

Forest Roads

5.13

Interpretive Displays

6.57

Information Sites

3.71

Organization Camps

0.31

Developed Fishing Site

0.76

Snowmobile Area/Trails

0.00

Downhill Ski Area

35.55

Nordic Trails

4.31

FS Lodge

4.37

FS Fire Lookout

1.92

Snowplay Area

0.76

Motorized Trails

3.05

Recreation Residence

4.42

 

 


 

Economic Information

 

About one-third of visitors interviewed were asked a series of questions that enabled economic analyses.  Several questions focused on the trip away from home that included their visit to the national forest, and others about their annual visits to the forest and annual spending on all outdoor recreation.

 

 

This trip away from home

 

While away from home, some people just go to the forest, while others incorporate a national forest visit as part of a larger trip away from home. On this forest, 90.50 percent said that recreating on this forest was their primary trip destination.  Visitors were asked to select one of several substitute choices, if for some reason they were unable to visit this national forest.  Their responses are shown in Table 15.  Less than 19 percent of visitors indicated their trip would include at least on night away from home.  The average number of nights away for those staying away overnight was 5.2.  About 18 percent indicated they would be staying overnight within 50 miles of this forest, and for them, the average number of nights in the local area was 2.6.   Visitors estimated the amount of money spent during their trip within 50 miles of the recreation site at which they were interviewed (the trip may include multiple national forest visits, as well as visits to other forests or parks).  This information will be available in a separate report and data file that can be used to estimate the local jobs and income that are generated by recreation visits to this forest.

 

 

Table 15.  Substitute behavior choices of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors

 

Substitute response

Percent who would have:

Come back another time

8.2

Stayed at Home

11.2

Gone elsewhere for the Same activity

55.9

Gone elsewhere for a Different activity

12.0

Gone to Work

10.6

Had some other substitute

2.0

 

Average annual outdoor recreation activity

 

In the 12 months prior to the interview the typical visitor had come to this forest 22.4 times for all activities, including 20 times to participate in their identified main activity.  Visitors were also asked about the amount of money they spent in a typical year on all outdoor recreation activities including equipment, recreation trips, memberships, and licenses.  Nearly 46% said they spent less then $500 per year, and a little less than 2% said they spent over $10,000 per year (Table 16). 

 

 

 

 

Table 16.  Annual recreation spending for visitors to the San Bernardino NF

 

$$ spent each year on outdoor recreation

Percent of Total

UNDER 500

46.18

500 -  999

21.45

1000 - 1999

16.73

2000 - 2999

9.09

3000 - 3999

1.82

4000 - 4999

0.73

5000 - 9999

2.91

OVER 10000

1.09

 

Visitor Satisfaction Information

 

About one-third of visitors interviewed on the forest rated their satisfaction with the recreation facilities and services provided.  Although their satisfaction ratings pertain to conditions at the specific site or area they visited, this information is not valid at the site-specific level.  The survey design does not usually have enough responses for every individual site or area on the forest to draw these conclusions.  Rather, the information is generalized to overall satisfaction with facilities and services on the forest as a whole. 

 

Visitors’ site-specific answers may be colored by a particular condition on a particular day at a particular site.  For example, a visitor camping in a developed campground when all the forest personnel are off firefighting and the site has not been cleaned.  Perhaps the garbage had not been emptied or the toilets cleaned during their stay, although the site usually receives excellent maintenance.  The visitor may have been very unsatisfied with the cleanliness of restrooms. 

 

In addition to how satisfied visitors were with facilities and services they were asked how important that particular facility or service was to the quality of their recreation experience.  The importance of these elements to the visitors’ recreation experience is then analyzed in relation to their satisfaction.  Those elements that were extremely important to a visitor’s overall recreation experience and the visitor rated as poor quality are those elements needing most attention by the forest.  Those elements that were rated not important to the visitors’ recreation experience need the least attention.

 

Tables 17 through 19 summarize visitor satisfaction with the forest facilities and services at Day Use Developed sites, Overnight Developed sites and General Forest areas.  Wilderness satisfaction is reported in Table 11.  To interpret this information for possible management action, one must look at both the importance and satisfaction ratings.  If visitors rated an element a 1 or 2 they are telling management that particular element is not very important to the overall quality of their recreation experience.  Even if the visitors rated that element as poor or fair, improving this element may not necessarily increase visitor satisfaction because the element was not that important to them.  On the other hand, if visitors rated an element as a 5 or 4 they are saying this element is very important to the quality of their recreation experience.  If their overall satisfaction with that element is not very good, management action here can increase visitor satisfaction. 

 

Table 17.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors at Developed Day Use sites

 

ITEM

Poor

Fair

Average

Good

Very Good

Average Rating

*

Mean Importance

**

N obs

Restroom cleanliness

7.3

2.2

12.3

55.0

23.2

3.8

4.0

85

Developed facility condition

0.0

0.0

8.0

57.7

34.2

4.3

3.9

96

Condition of environment

0.0

2.2

7.6

58.4

31.8

4.2

4.2

114

Employee helpfulness

0.3

0.0

18.4

43.8

37.5

4.2

4.0

63

Interpretive display

3.7

0.9

28.5

38.0

28.9

3.9

4.0

67

Parking availability

0.0

6.1

20.5

39.4

34.0

4.0

4.0

116

Parking lot condition

0.0

0.6

8.1

67.4

23.8

4.1

3.6

112

Rec. info. available

0.7

1.1

13.8

47.7

36.6

4.2

3.7

94

Road condition

0.0

3.4

9.5

51.5

35.6

4.2

4.0

97

Feeling of safety

0.2

0.0

6.0

27.1

66.7

4.6

4.5

113

Scenery

0.0

0.0

1.3

39.5

59.2

4.6

4.1

116

Signage adequacy

0.9

7.6

17.5

44.3

29.7

3.9

3.9

112

Trail condition

0.0

1.0

2.0

59.5

37.5

4.3

4.0

66

Value for fee paid

2.3

7.4

9.2

25.4

55.7

4.2

4.3

88

*Scale is: Poor = 1   Fair = 2   Average = 3   Good = 4   Very Good = 5

** Scale is: 1= not important   2= somewhat important   3=moderately important   4= important    5 = very important

N obs means the number of visitors who responded to this item.

Note: For items with less than 10 responses the data was not reported


 

Table 18.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors at Developed Overnight sites

 

ITEM

Poor

Fair

Average

Good

Very Good

Average Rating

*

Mean Importance

**

N obs

Restroom cleanliness

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Developed facility condition

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

6

 

Condition of environment

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Employee helpfulness

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

4

 

Interpretive display

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

3

 

Parking availability

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Parking lot condition

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Rec. info. available

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

7

 

Road condition

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Feeling of safety

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Scenery

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Signage adequacy

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

9

 

Trail condition

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

7

 

Value for fee paid

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

8

 

*Scale is: Poor = 1   Fair = 2   Average = 3   Good = 4   Very Good = 5

** Scale is: 1= not important   2= somewhat important   3=moderately important   4= important    5 = very important

N obs means the number of visitors who responded to this item.

Note: For items with less than 10 responses the data was not reported


 

 

 

Table 19.  Satisfaction of San Bernardino NF recreation visitors in General Forest Areas

 

ITEM

Poor

Fair

Average

Good

Very Good

Average Rating

*

Mean Importance

**

N obs

Restroom cleanliness

9.1

5.0

20.5

25.5

39.9

3.8

3.2

29

Developed facility condition

0.0

0.0

4.3

63.0

32.6

4.3

3.4

32

Condition of environment

1.5

1.6

4.2

49.1

43.7

4.3

4.4

81

Employee helpfulness

0.0

0.0

0.0

26.1

73.9

4.7

3.4

20

Interpretive display

0.0

4.8

3.0

39.0

53.1

4.4

3.4

26

Parking availability

0.0

3.7

2.6

44.6

49.1

4.4

3.5

51

Parking lot condition

0.0

1.1

4.4

34.3

60.2

4.5

3.6

43

Rec. info. available

6.8

5.7

33.5

42.7

11.3

3.5

3.6

48

Road condition

0.0

4.4

4.6

60.3

30.6

4.2

3.7

49

Feeling of safety

0.0

0.0

5.2

41.3

53.4

4.5

4.3

80

Scenery

0.0

0.5

2.1

37.4

60.1

4.6

4.6

81

Signage adequacy

1.7

16.5

30.4

34.7

16.7

3.5

3.6

72

Trail condition

0.0

0.0

7.5

48.9

43.6

4.4

3.8

63

Value for fee paid

4.1

0.0

12.9

31.6

51.5

4.3

4.4

46

*Scale is: Poor = 1   Fair = 2   Average = 3   Good = 4   Very Good = 5

** Scale is: 1= not important   2= somewhat important   3=moderately important   4= important    5 = very important

N obs means the number of visitors who responded to this item.

Note: For items with less than 10 responses the data was not reported.

 


Crowding

 

Visitors rated their perception of how crowded the recreation site or area felt to them.  This information is useful when looking at the type of site the visitor was using since someone visiting a designated Wilderness may think 5 people is too many while someone visiting a developed campground may think 200 people is about right.  Table 20 summarizes mean perception of crowding by site type on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means hardly anyone was there, and a 10 means the area was perceived as overcrowded. 

 

Table 20.  Perception of crowding by San Bernardino NF recreation visitors by site type (percent site visits)

 

Crowding Rating

Developed Day Use

Overnight Use

General Forest Area

Wilderness

10  Overcrowded

7.4

24.1

1.0

0.5

9

1.9

24.1

0.5

0.0

8

1.4

0.0

3.1

0.5

7

10.8

0.0

3.2

2.1

6

10.1

0.0

7.3

2.1

5

14.1

12.2

13.7

3.1

4

9.2

0.0

16.0

6.2

3

10.6

26.1

10.2

6.1

2

16.2

1.3

25.8

6.0

1  Hardly anyone there

18.2

12.2

19.2

73.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Other comments from visitors

 

Visitors were asked if there were any accommodations or assistance that the forest could offer that would be helpful to the visitor and anyone in their group to improve their recreation experience.  Responses are summarized in Table 21. 

 

Table 21.  List of comments received from San Bernadino NF recreation visitors

 

Site Name

What Accommodation could be made

100) Woodland Trail-51

availability of water

102) MWD Boat Ramp-51

more handicap accessibility

102) MWD Boat Ramp-51

lifeguard

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

water management

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

water on trails

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

drinking fountain (more and turn them on)

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

bridges replacement

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

availability of water

102a) Alpine Pedal Path-52

better signage, bathrooms

103) Juniper Pt Marina/Fishing-52

grade the road (access rd)

103) Juniper Pt Marina/Fishing-52

restrooms

88a) Middle Fork Rd-53

grade the road (access rd)

88b) Lytle Creek Rd-53

people leaving bar-b-que in Red Cowls

92) 1N35 (east)-53

clearer signs about Adventure Pass

96) Fawnskin-52

showers

96) Fawnskin-52

signage on none-access roads

APPLEWHITE PICNIC

better signs at Fruy off ramp

APPLEWHITE PICNIC

restrooms with water

APPLEWHITE PICNIC

restrooms

APPLEWHITE PICNIC

cleaner restrooms

BAYLIS PARK PICNIC

more trashcans

BAYLIS PARK PICNIC

more trail heads

BAYLIS PARK PICNIC

it would be nice if site was open at night with lights so you can see the signs better

CAHUILLA TEWANET INT SITE

better information available; better maps

CAHUILLA TEWANET INT SITE

village pub

DARK CANYON CG

better restroom facilities

FALLS PICNIC

more Spanish translations

FALLS PICNIC

more signs, public/private

FALLS PICNIC

sleeping (motels)

FALLS PICNIC

lack of rain over years affect on nature

FALLS PICNIC

make it bigger and running water (restrooms)

FALLS PICNIC

Vivian Creek trail needs to be improved

GFA 92) 1N 35 (east)

leave open for visitors

HEAPS PEAK ARBORETUM

information on weather patterns- why so dry?

LAKE FULMOR PICNIC

more sign in Spanish

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

unable to swim

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

restrooms

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

more maps and directions available

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

more available information on hunting stick to schedule

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

street lights- lighting

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

NF career opportunity available information

LAKE HEMET PICNIC

trail not long enough

Lytle Creek Rd

people leaving bar-b-que in Red Cowls

MARION MOUNTAIN CG

clean up debris ( stack piles of wood)

MEADOWS EDGE PICNIC

cigarette butts, litter- leave more signs; plastic bags to pick up dog poop

MEADOWS EDGE PICNIC

closing time, when restrooms are closed, dates/times/seasons, should be shown

NATIONAL CHILDRENS FOREST

more free campsites (prices are to high)

SNOWDRIFT SNOWPLAY AREA

free parking

SNOWDRIFT SNOWPLAY AREA

more employees to monitor children 6 and under

SNOWDRIFT SNOWPLAY AREA

free, the forest should be available to everyone

SNOWDRIFT SNOWPLAY AREA

free use of hilly slopes

Vivian Creek TH

more information on birds/species in area should be provided

W-14) Vivian Creek Parking

better climber trails to Lily Rock

W-14) Vivian Creek Parking

more information on birds/species in area should be provided

W-22) South Ridge TH

why is forestry changing American fees?; original intent was for use (free) of all America

W-24 Humber Plc TH

access to tour permits

W-24) Devil's Slide/Humber Park TH

access to tour permits

W-24) Devil's Slide/Humber Park TH

rangers-didn't see any

W-24a CLIMBERS TRAIL

why is forestry changing American fees?; original intent was for use (free) of all America

W-24a)  Climbers Trail

why is forestry changing American fees?; original intent was for use (free) of all America

W-6) South Fork Trail

rangers-didn't see any