Southern Research Station Update to the 2010 RPA Assessment: A Temporal Importance-Performance Analysis of Recreation Attributes on National Forests Mike Bowker Southern Research Station Ashley Askew University of Georgia March 7, 2018 Provide broad overview of the findings of the Update to the 2010 RPA – opportunities for more detailed findings at upcoming webinars

Collaborators Don English, FS NVUM Program Manager Gary Green, University of Georgia Stan Zarnoch, FS Southern Research Station

The RPA Assessment The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 mandates a national report (RPA Assessment) on the conditions and trends of renewable resources every ten years on all forest and rangelands. The RPA Assessment provides a snapshot of current U.S. forest and rangeland conditions and trends; identifies drivers of change; and projects 50 years into the future (2010-2060). The Assessment includes analyses of forests, urban forests, rangelands, water, outdoor recreation, biodiversity, fish and wildlife, wilderness, and the potential effects of climate change on these resources/activities.

Update to the 2010 RPA Assessment Builds on 2010 RPA Assessment analyses and findings Updates resource trends with more recent data Provides new projections for rangeland resources, forest carbon, wood pellets Recreation Projections National  Regional Trends over 10 yrs NF Visitor Satisfaction 

Today’s Objectives Trends in Importance/Satisfaction (IPA) National forest visitors RPA regions 4 setting types 2 time periods IPA -- Forest/site attributes Standard Likert’s -- Satisfaction/Crowding

GTR SRS-223, August 2017 Focus on recreationists as consumers: Satisfaction levels  visitation sustainability Survey data  Implications for managers/planners

Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) Origins in marketing (Martilla & James, 1977) Applications to recreation research Recreationist  Customer/consumer Two-dimensional assessment Decision-making tool with thresholds Previous applications static Sustainability indicator?? Thresholds may be pre-defined at a fixed value, like 4 and up, or it can be a statistic, such as mean, median, and mode. Here, we have such a dominance at 4’s and 5’s that we use a weighted mean for relative performers. All are performing very well with respect to a threshold of 4, but a weighted mean gives us relative performances since decisions might need to be made which focus on best/lesser performers. Thresholds Predetermined goal or limits (e.g., 4 on a 5-point Likert scale) Measure of central tendency (mean, median, or mode)

National Visitor Use Monitoring Program NVUM Systematic over NFs: Aggregation for regional analysis 5-year periods  Rounds Round 2: FY2005-FY2009 Round 3: FY2010-FY2014 Site types: DUDS, OUDS, GFA, and WILD Variable in recreation opportunities Respondents: Last-exiting recreationists On-site data Stratified random sampling

NVUM Basic, Economic, and Satisfaction modules for questionnaires 5-point Likert scale for importance and satisfaction Likert Scale Rating Satisfaction 1 Very Dissatisfied 2 Somewhat Dissatisfied 3 Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied 4 Somewhat Satisfied 5 Very Satisfied

NVUM Survey Profile: Survey Type

NVUM Survey Profile: Primary Purpose Our analysis included all recreation visitors whether NF main destination or not.

NVUM Instrument

Attributes Here we point out that not all attributes are applicable to all four site types. Some are applicable only to developed site types or to GFA but not WILD.

Regional and National Assessment RPA Regions FS Regions Attributes for four site types: WILD (5), GFA (8), DUDS (11), and OUDS (11)

Example of Score Distribution Now for a two-dimensional perspective, we look at importance and frequency simultaneously. Weighted frequencies (by inverse annual trips)

WILD, IPA Plotting and Classifications CH GW LP Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell. PO

WILD Trends, Round 3 Classifications No transitions into CH interior GW in NATENVR and SCENERY for all regions and nation Statistical significance of shifts? WILD N S RM PC Nat NATENVR GW SCENERY SAFETY PO GW/PO* GW/PO TRAILS LP PO/GW LP/CH VALUE GW/PO = in interior of “keep up the good work” but near boundary to “possible overkill” interior Use lead in to need for t-testing *A/B = In interior of A but close to boundary near B

WILD Trends, Shifts to Round 3 Potentially concerning trends: TRAILS (S) Monitor increasingly important attributes Satisfaction steady or increasing in N, RM, PC, and Nation (statistical significance)

WILD Recommendations Concentrate here (Relatively high importance, relatively low satisfaction) None  Keep up the good work Scenery at this site/area (All) Condition of the natural environment (All) Feeling of safety (South and Rocky Mountain) Possible overkill Feeling of safety (North, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Value for fees paid (Pacific Coast) Condition of forest trails (South)

WILD Recommendations Potential areas of concern (importance > satisfaction) Scenery at this site/area (South) Condition of the natural environment (North, South, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Condition of forest trails (South)

GFA, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

GFA, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

GFA, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

GFA Trends, Shifts to Round 3

GFA Recommendations Concentrate here Keep up the good work Condition of forest trails (North and Rocky Mountain) Keep up the good work Condition of the natural environment (All) Scenery at this site/area (All) Feeling of safety (All) Possible overkill Condition of forest trails (Pacific Coast)

GFA Recommendations Potential areas of concern (importance > satisfaction) Condition of the natural environment (North, South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Adequacy of signage to site (All) Condition of forest trails (North and South) Value for fee paid (North, South, and Pacific Coast) Condition of forest roads (South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Feeling of safety (South)

DUDS, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

DUDS, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

DUDS Trends, Shifts to Round 3

DUDS Recommendations Concentrate here Keep up the good work Cleanliness of restrooms (All) Adequacy of signage to this site (North, South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Value for fees paid (North, Rocky Mountain, and Nation) Condition of forest roads (South) Condition of forest trails (North and South) Keep up the good work Condition of the natural environment (All) Scenery at this site/area (All) Feeling of safety (All) Value for fee paid (South) Condition of forest trails (Pacific Coast)

DUDS Recommendations Potential areas of concern (importance > satisfaction) Cleanliness of restrooms (All) Adequacy of signage to site (All) Value for fee paid (North, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Condition of forest trails (South) Condition of forest roads (South) Condition of the natural environment (North, South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation)

OUDS, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

OUDS, IPA Plotting and Classifications Cross hair means developed by region and site-type for Round 2 across attributes for that cell.

OUDS Trends, Shifts to Round 3 All increasingly important attributes in South

OUDS Recommendations Concentrate here Cleanliness of restrooms (All) Adequacy of signage to site (North, South, Rocky Mountain, and Nation) Condition of forest trails (South) Condition of forest roads (South) Condition of developed recreation facilities (South) Value for fee paid (Rocky Mountain)

OUDS Recommendations Potential areas of concern (importance > satisfaction) Cleanliness of restrooms (All) Condition of forest trails (South) Condition of forest roads (South and Rocky Mountain) Adequacy of signage to site/area (South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Condition of developed recreation facilities (South) Available parking (South) Condition of the natural environment (South, Rocky Mountain, Pacific Coast, and Nation) Value for fee paid (Rocky Mountain)

Crowding and Overall Satisfaction Crowding: Likert scale, 1 (hardly anyone) to 10 (overcrowded) Overall satisfaction: 5-point scale, 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied) Comprehensive metrics Impact of crowding levels by activity and setting (i.e., WILD)

Overall Satisfaction

Satisfaction and Crowding Trends Rising or steady overall satisfaction in all site types and regions Decreased crowding ratings South DUDS and WILD Many increased crowding ratings, largest WILD (PC) and OUDS (N) Need to explain clearly. For example decreased crowding ratings are BAD, increased crowding ratings are GOOD. Not everyone will catch that right away.

Conclusions and Directions IPA Key Findings Highest scores: Condition of natural environment, scenery, and safety WILD  Generally quite good, trails maybe emerging concern in South? GFA  Overall GW, possible attention for trails (RM) DUDS, OUDS  Improvement of restroom cleanliness and adequacy of signage Crowding generally improved ratings Overall satisfaction stable or improving (North WILD, South OUDS)

Questions…. Sustainable recreation measure? More informative partitioning, scaling, grouping? RPA region level vs alternatives? Ecoregion, proximity to population centers, etc.? Combining with non-NVUM data? Ideas about modeling and projecting ratings? YOUR Questions… Thank you!