Page:Joshua Tree National Park Visitor Study - Spring 2004.pdf/38

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Joshua Tree NP VSP Visitor Study
April 3–9, 2004

Visitor groups rated the importance and quality of each of the information services and facilities they used. The following five-point scales were used in the questionnaire.

IMPORTANCE
5=extremely important
4=very important
3=moderately important
2=somewhat important
1=not important

QUALITY
5=very good
4=good
3=average
2=poor
1=very poor

The average importance and quality ratings for each information service and facility were determined based on ratings provided by visitors who used each service and facility. Figures 32 and 33 show the average importance and quality ratings for each of the park services and facilities. All services and facilities were rated above average in importance and quality. Note: travelers information radio station, orientation video, and Junior Ranger Program were not rated by enough visitors to provide reliable data.

Figures 34–48 show the visitor groups' importance ratings for each of the services/facilities. The services/facilities receiving the highest proportion of “extremely important” or “very important” ratings included park brochure/map (86%), self-guided trail brochures (83%), and assistance from visitor center staff (79%). The highest proportion of “not important” ratings were for assistance from entrance station staff (4%).

Figures 49–63 show the visitor groups' quality ratings for each of the services/facilities. The services/facilities receiving the highest proportion of “very good” or “good” ratings included assistance from visitor center staff (92%), ranger-led programs (89%), and assistance from roving rangers (88%). The services/facilities receiving the highest “very poor” rating by visitor groups were assistance from entrance station staff (3%) and ranger-led programs (3%).

Figure 64 combines the “very good” and “good” quality ratings and compares those ratings for all of the information services and facilities.


34