MSU, William H.

Darr School of Agriculture Master of Natural and Applied Sciences Program

An Overview and Economic Analysis of the MO Department of Conservations Springfield Conservation Nature Center Visitor User Survey
An interpretation of data from information obtained from the 2011 visitor user survey to meet the requirements for the MNAS Internship

2011

Prepared By:

Krystal Drysdale, MNAS program

Supervised by:

Dr. Benjamin Onyango,

Missouri State University Graduate Advisor

Linda Chorice,
MDC Springfield Conservation Nature Center Director

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................4 1.1 Background and Purpose ..................................................................................................................................6 1.2 Intern Naturalist Responsibilities ......................................................................................................................7 1.3 The Missouri Department of Conservation .......................................................................................................7 1.4 Springfield Conservation Nature Center ..........................................................................................................9 Visitor User Survey Project Description ..................................................................................................................10 2.1 Scope and Purpose......................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Visitor User Observation Conditions ............................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Survey Design ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Used Tools ................................................................................................................................................................11 3.1 EViews 6 Student Version............................................................................................................................. 11 3.2 SQL Server 2005 ........................................................................................................................................... 11 3.3 Mobile Trimble Nomad Units ....................................................................................................................... 12 Survey Results ..........................................................................................................................................................12 4.1 General Observations .................................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 Demographic Series....................................................................................................................................... 13 4.2.1 Age and Gender ...................................................................................................................................... 13 4.2.2 Ethnicity ................................................................................................................................................. 14 4.2.3 Disabilities .............................................................................................................................................. 15 4.2 Usage Series .................................................................................................................................................. 15 4.2.1 Party Averages........................................................................................................................................ 15 4.2.2 Primary and Secondary Purpose ............................................................................................................. 16 4.2.4 My Idea by Gender ................................................................................................................................. 17 4.2.5 My Idea by Age ...................................................................................................................................... 17 4.3 Preference Series ........................................................................................................................................... 18 4.3.1 Visit Rating............................................................................................................................................. 18 4.3.2 How First Heard About SCNC ............................................................................................................... 18 4.3.3 Top Words .............................................................................................................................................. 19 4.3.4 School Type ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Interpretive Summary ...............................................................................................................................................20 5.1 Why are people primarily visiting the SCNC? .............................................................................................. 20

5.2 Who is visiting the SCNC?............................................................................................................................ 21 5.3 Safety seems to be of importance to visitors. ................................................................................................ 21 5.4 Whos idea is it really and how often do they visit? ..................................................................................... 22 5.5 How are visitor groups with children represented? ....................................................................................... 23 5.6 Visitor groups tended to be made up of mostly adults-only .......................................................................... 24 5.7 Considerations for persons with disabilities .................................................................................................. 25 5.8 If not by word of mouth, how do people hear about SCNC? ........................................................................ 26 5.9 Do the results correlate with the purpose of the SCNC? ............................................................................... 27 5.10 Possible Bias in the results .......................................................................................................................... 27 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................28 References ................................................................................................................................................................29 Appendix A ..............................................................................................................................................................30 Appendix B...............................................................................................................................................................33

Table of Tables
Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: EViews Results for First Time Visitors....21 EViews Results for School Type..23 EViews Results for How Heard About SCNC.....25 EViews Results for Respondents Who Had Been Interviewed Before........26

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Figure 1: The MO Department of Conservation regional map (MDC.com, 2011) .....................................8 Figure 2: Hierarchy of Missouri Conservation Divisions ...........................................................................................8 Figure 3: Monthly Unique Visitor Estimates Recorded by Survey ......................................................................... 13 Figure 4: Age Distribution of Visitors Surveyed ..................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5: Gender Percentage of Visitors .................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 6: Ethnicity Percentage of Visitors Surveyed ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: Comparative Percentages of Persons Reporting Disabilities ................................................................... 15 Figure 8: Primary Purpose of Respondents ............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9: Comparison of Primary Purpose Use of Adults and Children.................................................................. 17 Figure 10: Age Groups of Respondents Who Reported that it Was Their Idea to Visit .......................................... 18 Figure 11: 33% of Respondents Who Reported Finding Out About SCNC Other than Word of Mouth ................ 19 Figure 12: EViews Satisfaction Responses.............................................................................................................. 20 Figure 13: EViews Results for Annual Visits .......................................................................................................... 23 Figure 14: EViews Results for Total Adults in Visitor Groups ............................................................................... 25 Figure 15: EViews Results for Total Children in Visitor Groups ............................................................................ 25

Introduction
1.1 Background and Purpose The Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) and the Missouri Conservation Commission were created by Article IV Sections 40-42 of the Missouri Constitution, which were adopted by the voters of the state in 1936 as Amendment 4 to the constitution. The Commission is responsible for the control, management, restoration, conservation, and regulation of bird, fish, game, forestry, and wildlife resources of the state. The Department of Conservation owns and oversees hatcheries, sanctuaries, refuges, and reservations, and enforces the state wildlife code. In Springfield, MO the department manages the Springfield Conservation Nature Center (SCNC) which is an 80 acre property that helps to connect Missouri residents with nature. Direct interaction with plants and animal resources are offered through services such as skills classes, events, outreach programs and trails. During the 2011 calendar year, Nature Center staff and volunteers conducted a visitor user survey and focus groups to identify current usage of the property and possible future changes to increase visitor traffic. As an intern Naturalist for the Department, part of my duties included participation in the survey. Trail usage continues to be the primary purpose for visitors at the Springfield Conservation Nature Center. However, the center offers many other resources and programs and seeks to better understand how visitors utilize the SCNC as a whole. A lack of information exists on reasons why people choose to participate or not to participate in the many opportunities that exist at the SCNC. The overall purpose of this report is in part to document some of the experiences I obtained through the internship requirement of the Missouri State University (MSU) Masters of Natural and applied Sciences program with the SCNC, and in part to provide additional economic analysis of the visitor user survey and focus groups conducted in 2011. Because I have taken a graduate studies focus in Natural Resource Economics, participation in the visitor user survey was beneficial to both my program and the MO Department of Conservation. Through the internship I was able to learn more about the conservation efforts of Missouris fish, forests, and wildlife. Through this analysis I am able to provide additional information beyond the original scope of the departments study by applying key concepts in economic evaluation of natural resources related to conservation management.

1.2 Intern Naturalist Responsibilities It is the policy of the MO Department of Conservation to encourage, welcome, support, and recognize volunteerism (MDC Handbook, 2010). During 2010, I was invited to become a volunteer intern for the MO Department of Conservation at the Nature Center. Only 2 internships were awarded in the 2010-2011 years. Volunteer interns patrol trails, answer questions, enforce minor area regulations, staff the visitor information desk, and assist with special projects. Interns are also responsible for the organization, preparation, and presentation of interpretive programs to schools, the public, and other organized groups. Interns may also carry out or assist with projects which require specific expertise or talent (MDC Handbook, 2010). Because of the nature and scope of the information presented in this report, the Director of the Nature Center, Linda Chorice, was very interested to see what additional information could be obtained and presented to the department for consideration and review. 1.3 The Missouri Department of Conservation

The SCNC is only a piece of the larger entity that exists as the Missouri Department of Conservation. The entire department is funded by a 1/8 cent sales tax and was the first statewide conservation program to be implemented in the U.S. The department was conceived at the low point of U.S. conservation history. Unregulated hunting, fishing and trapping and the abuse of forests had decimated the states natural resources. Missouri sportsman devised a solution that was as simple as it was revolutionary. They drafted a constitutional amendment creating the worlds first non-political, science based conservation agency with exclusive authority over forests, fish and wildlife (MDC handbook, 2010) The Mission and Vision statements for the MO Department of Conservation are listed as follows:
Mission: To protect and manage the fish, forest and wildlife resources of the state; to serve the public and facilitate their participation in resource management activities; and to provide opportunity for all citizens to use, enjoy and learn about fish, forest and wildlife resources. Vision: To have healthy, sustainable plant and animal communities throughout the state of Missouri for future generations to use and enjoy, and to have fish, forest and wildlife resources in appreciably better condition tomorrow than they are today. To have all Missourians understand the relationship and value of plant and animal communities to our social and economic well-being. To have citizens and government agencies work together to protect, sustain, enhance, restore or create sustainable plant and animal communities of local, state and national significance.
Statements taken from MDC Handbook, 2010

The Missouri Department of Conservation is divided into 2 units and 8 regions. The northern part of the state is described as the Missouri River unit containing the Northwest, Northeast, Kansas City and Central regions. The southern part of the state is called the Ozark unit, which describes the St. Louis, Southwest, Ozark, and Southeast regions. These different regions are managed independently of each other, but adhere to the overall objectives of the Conservation Department.

Figure 1: Figure 1: The MO Department of Conservation regional map (MDC.com, 2011)

In addition to being separated geographically into regions, the department is organized into 10 divisions that specialize in different management practices. The SCNC is part of the broader Outreach and Education division.
Figure 2: Hierarchy of Missouri Conservation Divisions

1.4 Springfield Conservation Nature Center The SCNC contains eighty acres of forests, fields and creeks, along with frontage on Lake Springfield. There is much wildlife on the property including deer, foxes, mink, muskrat, raccoons, squirrels, birds, turtles, frogs, bugs and just about everything else that lives in the Ozarks. Additionally, visitors have access to nearly three miles of trails including a boardwalk over the marshy shallows of the lake. Inside the visitor center building, the public can utilize a 150-seat auditorium, classrooms, exhibits, information desk, sales of books, calendars, and fishing and hunting permits and participate in regularly scheduled public programs, guided walks and nature films. There is also a covered sack lunch area, pull-through bus and RV parking, and facilities are accessible to persons with disabilities. Because the SCNC is operated by the Missouri Department of Conservation, a state agency supported by fishing and hunting license revenues and a statewide 1/8-of-one-percent sales tax, no fees are charged at the center. The current SCNC regulations do not allow pets, horses, hunting, fishing, collecting, littering, fires or alcoholic beverages on the area. Bicycles, skating, skateboards, rollerblades, scooters, and motorized vehicles are not permitted on trails. Building/trail hours vary and are as follows:
Building Hours: March 1 to October 31: Tuesday Saturday, 8am to 5pm; Sunday, Noon to 5pm; Closed Monday November 1 to February 29: Tuesday Saturday, 8am to 5pm; Closed Sunday and Monday

Area and Trail Hours: March 1 to October 31: Daily, 8am to 8pm November 1 to February 29: Daily, 8am to 6pm

Building, Area, and Trail Closings The nature center building, trails, and area will be closed on New Years Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. The building is always closed on Monday, including all state holidays.

Visitor User Survey Project Description

2.1 Scope and Purpose The purpose of the 2011 visitor user survey was to obtain demographic and preference data that could be interpreted into useful information for the department describing how visitors were utilizing SCNC (See Appendix A). The survey was one of many visitor user studies conducted for conservation properties in Missouri. The data acquired to date has been interpreted by the department itself in a biannual report. In this report, additional descriptive statistics will be interpreted from the data beyond that which was provided by the Research & Development Division of MDC. The visitor user survey will be conducted in its entirety over a 12 month period beginning on Jan 1, 2011. For the purposes of completing this report prior to the end of the Missouri State University fall semester, data compiled over a 6 month period from Jan 1, 2011 June 30, 2011was used. In total, there were 945 observations (surveys), from which this report seeks to interpret. 2.2 Visitor User Observation Conditions The survey was conducted at the exit of the parking lot. Cones were set up to provide visitors a pull-through survey area. Visitors leaving the property were asked if they would be willing to participate in a visitor exit survey from their vehicle. The survey times were selected at random by computer (7 per month) constrained by the SCNC area hours in order to capture users across all timeframes (see Appendix B). The survey was conducted for the driver of each vehicle or a party leader if another means of transportation was taken. The total survey period was 60 minutes with the total survey time averaging between 3-8 minutes per party. Handheld mobile computers were used to record data. One survey clerk was responsible for tallying vehicle types on a designated tally unit. Two additional survey clerks recorded responses to the survey questions on the other survey units. All of the data was then loaded onto the main server and compiled with the other survey results. 2.3 Survey Design A series of predetermined questions were managed from the handheld mobile units. Survey clerks were asked to follow loosely a script (see appendix A) containing each of the questions. The first series of questions required respondents to reveal how many people were in the vehicle, their zip code, estimated annual visits and how long they spent at SCNC on this visit. The next series of questions

10

revealed preferences on why they came that day, what is important when they visit, activities they did while on the area, and satisfaction of their visit. Then respondents were asked a series of demographic questions including sex, age, race, and disabilities. Lastly, visitors were asked to reveal who made the decision to come, how they first heard about the nature center, and if children were present in the car, what type of schooling they received (public, private, or homeschooled.) Each question was designed to reveal certain characteristics about SCNC users that the staff at SCNC felt would help them to better determine the needs of visitors. Some of the series required the respondents to give a unique description while other series asked respondents to choose from a list of given descriptors.

Used Tools
3.1 EViews 6 Student Version

EViews (Econometric Views) is a statistical package for Windows, used for estimation, forecasting, statistical analysis and simulation of time-series oriented econometric analysis. It is developed by Quantitative Micro Software (QMS), now a part of IHS. The version used in this study was the EViews 6 student version. The version used is a modified version of the standard edition of EViews 6 offering different licensing terms, some capacity and feature restrictions, and restricted technical support. In all other respects, the student version is identical to the standard version of EViews 6. 3.2 SQL Server 2005 The survey data was entered into and stored in SQL server. Microsoft SQL Server is a relational database management system (RDBMS) produced by Microsoft. Its primary query language is TransactSQL, an implementation of the ANSI/ISO standard Structured Query Language (SQL) used by both Microsoft and Sybase. SQL Server is commonly used by businesses for small- to medium-sized databases, but the past five years have seen greater adoption of the product for larger enterprise databases.

11

3.3 Mobile Trimble Nomad Units

The survey questionnaire was transferred to mobile Trimble units and the surveys were conducted car side. The Trimble Nomad outdoor rugged handheld computer makes it easy to collect, save and transmit data with its many built-in capabilities. The units run on the Windows Mobile 6.1 operating system, has a touch screen for data entry or a numeric keypad. The Nomad contains one of the fastest processors in the Windows Mobile device market, made even faster with Trimble proprietary technologies for optimized graphics processing, advanced caching and high-speed journaling file system.

Survey Results
4.1 General Observations

In total, data was obtained on 1643 individuals from 945 conducted visitor user surveys. Survey respondents were allowed to not answer specific questions if they chose to do so which resulted in some query values of a non-value. These non-value results were excluded from any totals or percentages represented within this report. Only the value where data was actually recorded was included in the analysis of each series. Any non-values were reported separately to note that they would not have had a significant impact on the overall results.

4.1.1 Unique Visitors per Month

A weighted estimation was determined by the Research & Development Division for traffic of SCNC to determine the months with the highest levels of visitor use. The month that received the highest level of traffic was May. The remaining 5 months were in decreasing order, January, April, March, June, and February. This report did not have access to the methods used to obtain the traffic data, but seeks to correlate other series data. The breakdown of the monthly traffic estimates can be seen in the following chart.

12

Figure 3: Monthly Unique Visitor Estimates Recorded by Survey

4.2 Demographic Series 4.2.1 Age and Gender Respondents to the survey where asked a series of demographic questions including gender, age, ethnicity and disabilities. Most visitors were between the ages of 45-64 (25%). The next largest group of visitors came from young children between the ages of 0-11 (19%) and then young adults between the ages of 25-34 (18%) probably accounting for parents of the young children age bracket. The age group with the least presence was of children 12-15 (3%) and teenagers 16-17 (1%). Of the 1623 individuals represented by the gender query, 54% were female, whereas 46% were male (see figure 6). Twenty-two queries out of the 1623 responses resulted in a non-value because the respondent chose not to answer the question.
Figure 4: Age Distribution of Visitors Surveyed

13

Figure 5: Gender Percentage of Visitors

4.2.2 Ethnicity The majority of the respondents who provided demographic information on ethnicity were white, accounting for 92% of visitors surveyed. Of the remaining ethnicity groups there was no real difference between them with all the remaining values falling between 1-2% of the visitors surveyed.

Figure 6: Ethnicity Percentage of Visitors Surveyed

14

4.2.3 Disabilities

In general, 95% of respondents reported no disabilities. Of the remaining 5% of persons with disabilities the majority were people with hearing impairments (46%). Secondly, the majority was mobility impairments (32% of all respondents with disabilities).

Figure 7: Comparative Percentages of Persons Reporting Disabilities

4.2 Usage Series

4.2.1 Party Averages Of the 1521 unique visitors surveyed from a car the average party size was 1.86. The average time spent at SCNC for the time period surveyed was 1.52 hours. The average unique visits that survey respondents reported was 7.04 days per calendar year. The average distance traveled to the SCNC per visit was 14.97 miles. Of the remaining 102 unique visitors who came to the SCNC by some other means (i.e. walking, biking, etc.) the average party size was 1.24. The average time spent was 1.24 hours with respondents reporting that they visited an average of 5.07 times per calendar year. The average distance traveled was 3.82 miles.

15

4.2.2 Primary and Secondary Purpose Respondents were asked to give their primary and secondary purpose for their visit. It was already widely known that the primary purpose of SCNC is the use of the trails. This was confirmed by the results with 69% of respondents reporting that they primarily came to hike the trails at SCNC. The following is a general breakdown of the percentage of respondents with designated responses and was taken from the departments mid-year synopsis of the survey results.
Figure 8: Primary Purpose of Respondents

In addition to the results obtained from the departmental findings, I felt that it would be beneficial to analyze the responses to determine the usage of adults vs. children (see figure 5). This would help to better provide a snapshot as to how the primary and secondary purposes were used for visitors with children. It seems that although trail usage is the greatest utilized resource, for families with children who come to SCNC, the primary purpose is through use of exhibits, programs and nature viewing. Outside of activities where it is assumed that adults would be a larger participant when compared to children (i.e. meetings, gift shop, and information seeking visitors) the results confirm a much wider percentage of adults (with/without children) are visiting SCNC for the primary purpose of hiking the trails.

16

Figure 9: Comparison of Primary Purpose Use of Adults and Children

4.2.4 My Idea by Gender One of the survey questions including determining who in the visitor users party brought up the idea of visiting the SCNC. Of the respondents surveyed who traveled to the SCNC by car, the majority of visitors said it was a females idea to come (58.6%). Additionally 41.4% reported that it was a males idea to visit. Of the visitors who came to the SCNC by some other method other than a vehicle, 100% of the respondents said that it was a males idea to visit that day. 4.2.5 My Idea by Age Of the visitors who traveled by car and who said it was their idea to visit the SCNC, the majority of respondents were between the ages of 45-64 (28.9%). The second largest group was between the ages of 25-34 (25.1%). Of the visitors who came to the SCNC by some other method than a vehicle, the majority (40.8%) were between the ages of 25-34, and secondly the ages of 35-44 representing 27.2%. The age groups are represented by the percentages in the following figure across both methods of transportation to determine the largest age groups who reported that it was their idea to visit the SCNC.

17

Figure 10: Age Groups of Respondents Who Reported that it Was Their Idea to Visit

4.3 Preference Series For the questions to determine preferences of visitors, users were asked questions about their overall satisfaction of their visit, their methods by which they obtain information about the SCNC and the top words that would describe the importance of features of the SCNC. 4.3.1 Visit Rating Respondents were asked to rate their overall visit on a scale of 1-5, with a designated rating of 5 to be the best. From this question 82% of visitors surveyed gave a 5 rating to their satisfaction of their visit. Of the remaining responses, 10.6% gave a rating of 4, 4.9% gave a rating of 3, 0.4% gave a rating of 2, and only 0.7% gave a rating of 1.

4.3.2 How First Heard About SCNC When asked how they first heard about the nature center, respondents reported in majority (77%) that they first learned about SCNC through word of mouth. Of the remaining 33% who reported

18

otherwise, the information about SCNC came through 2 primary sources, school (32%) and MDC signage (30%).

Figure 11: 33% of Respondents Who Reported Finding Out About SCNC Other than Word of Mouth

4.3.3 Top Words Respondents were asked to provide their preferred words (2-3) that would be the most important to them when visiting the SCNC. From the list of words given, the respondents said the following words in order of importance: Trails (76.8%), Safety (47.2%), Cleanliness (39.2%), Hours (25.9%), Exhibits (22.6%), Friendliness (17.5%), Programs (15.0%), and Gift Shop (2.9%). 4.3.4 School Type Although not every survey group had children ages 0-18 in their party, if a child was listed in the survey party a last question was asked regarding the description of the type of school that the child attended. By majority (24.8%) of children were present in the survey group and were in a public school system. The next largest group was children who were homeschooled (7%). There were 5.5% of children in a private school system and the remaining 5.1% of respondents said other or chose not to answer the question.

19

Interpretive Summary

5.1 Why are people primarily visiting the SCNC? The SCNC provides a valuable resource to visitors in Springfield, MO and surrounding areas. In general, respondents ranked their visit to the SCNC between a 4 or 5 on a 5 point scale (90.25% of respondents), suggesting high levels of satisfaction from their visitor use. There were 59 respondents who did not answer the question and 12 respondents responded with no answer (7.52% of respondents).

Figure 12: EViews Satisfaction Responses

The primary activity reported by visitors was the use of the trails. Although SCNC staff and MDC personnel had previous evidence to suggest this, the findings from the visitor user survey show that it is an overwhelming majority (69%) of people who come to the SCNC specifically for that purpose. Additionally, when asked to give their top 2-3 words that were most

Tabulation of PRIMARYRATING Date: 12/07/11 Time: 11:05 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 944 Number of categories: 7 Cumulative Count 59 64 66 80 185 932 944 944 Cumulative Percent 6.25 6.78 6.99 8.47 19.60 98.73 100.00 100.00

Value 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total

Count 59 5 2 14 105 747 12 944

Percent 6.25 0.53 0.21 1.48 11.12 79.13 1.27 100.00

important when they visit the SCNC, visitors surveyed again in overwhelming majority cited Trails (76.8%). The SCNC is the only conservation area for the community that provides a large amount of walkable trails on 80 acres. Although there are other managed pathways and properties in the greater Springfield, MO area, many of them are limited in their capacity to provide programs, exhibits as well as close encounters with nature. Although the primary reason the Missouri Department of Conservation

created the hiking trails was to provide a place for people to interact with nature, the visitors to the SCNC cited additional reasons for use of the trails. People reported many ways in which they utilize the trails including recreation, exercise, and nature viewing as noted by their responses given when citing trail use as a primary purpose.

20

Outside of trail use, in general the remaining primary reasons people came to the SCNC were quite small in comparison. Respondents reported Programs/Fieldtrips (9%), Nature Viewing (7%), and Exhibits (9%). The staff of SCNC wants to better understand why the public is underutilizing these additional resources available to the visitors.

5.2 Who is visiting the SCNC? In general, the ethnicity data obtained from this survey is in line with the general data for the area. The majority (92%) were white, with black, Asian, Native American, and other representing only a small percentage of visitors. Additionally, the majority of visitors were between the ages of 45-64. This response does coincide with the primary purposes mentioned above. Secondly, it was children between the ages of 0-11 (19%) that represented the second largest group of visitors, however, this group would have to have been accompanied by at least one adult per group. Because parents or guardians of children within this age group would most likely coincide with adults 25-34, it is natural to see this group represented very closely to the same percentage at 18%. It was also a natural correlation to see that visitors with children had a tendency to state Exhibits and Programs/Field trips as their primary purpose for their visit more often than visitors who came without children.

Table 1: EViews Results for First Time Visitors

Although it was expected to represent the minority of visitors, there were an underwhelming (7.2%) percentage of visitors who said it was their first time to visit SCNC. This suggests that more resources could be focused on increasing new user traffic through marketing and advertising, or by

Tabulation of FIRSTTIME Date: 12/07/11 Time: 10:58 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 944 Number of categories: 2 Cumulative Count 876 944 944 Cumulative Percent 92.80 100.00 100.00

Value 0 1 Total

Count 876 68 944

Percent 92.80 7.20 100.00

increasing services and programs currently available to users. It could also be valuable to see the preference data reported by this group to see if a trend is present in capturing a certain market group

21

(young families, new residents, retired adults, etc.) And if so, maybe resources could be expanded to encourage other user groups to engage in activities at SCNC.

5.3 Safety seems to be of importance to visitors. This coincides with the results obtained for both the primary and secondary reasons for respondents visits. After Trails at 76.8%, Safety was the next highest ranked word important to visitors of SCNC at 47.2%. If the primary purpose for their visit is trail use, it would be a natural connection to the safety on the trails. This could be interpreted in a variety of ways. Respondents could be referring to the fact that the trails are an open space, public use resource that could be viewed as safety relative to people being unmonitored on the trails. They could be referring to the safety of how they are using the trails (i.e. running or jogging on the varying terrain). Or it could be viewed as safety from the perspective of young families and small children using the trails. Although staff and volunteers frequently monitor the trails to ensure the safety of visitors, because of the size of the trails visitors to the area may not always see them.

5.4 Whos idea is it really and how often do they visit? It is generally expected that females will tend to have a larger impact on decisions made in households when it comes to influence related to childrens activities and educational exposure. This was confirmed with the results by the majority of women in the survey parties saying that it was indeed their idea to visit the nature center. What was interesting to see was in visitor groups who came to the SCNC by some other means other than a vehicle. An astonishing 100% of all groups who did not arrive in a vehicle surveyed said it was alternatively a males idea to visit. These groups additionally, had no children present within the group. This suggests that this particular visitor type chose to visit the SCNC primarily for trail use and exercise as it was a more active approach to coming to the SCNC when compared to a vehicle. Although the distance was shorter for this visitor group, it would be expected considering that the SCNC serves an area much larger than just Springfield, MO.

22

Figure 13: EViews Results for Annual Visits

Although distance traveled would be correlated with frequency of visits, for the purposes of this report only data on the average days visited per year was analyzed. It would be important to note that further travel data could be made from the results obtained from this survey. For instance this data could be applied to age groups to reveal how often different age segments are visiting and if there is a trend in a particular group. Here, values were grouped in increments to reveal in a general sense how often visitors return in a given year. The respondents reported annual visits such as the following:

Tabulation of VISITS Date: 12/07/11 Time: 11:37 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 895 Number of categories: 69

0-10 days annually 11-25 days annually 26-50 days annually 51-100 days annually 101-250 days annually 250+ days annually

36.65% 17.97% 12.18% 12.51% 16.88% 5.57%

The results from this question support the conclusion that quite a large percentage of visitors have limited use of the SCNC resources. The most common responses to this question, however, were 12 days (7.26%), 100 days (5.7%) and 150 days (5.14%). Even though the majority of respondents reported less than 10 visits annually, the average was 59.85 days a year.

Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 15 16 20 21 24 25 26 30 35 36 40 45 48 49 50 52 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100 104 110 120 125 130 150 155 156 160 170 175 180 190 200 208 210 220 240 250 255 260 300 310 312 320 325 340 350 355 360 362 365 Total

Count 69 56 43 27 29 31 32 3 8 1 29 65 2 17 2 35 1 20 19 3 33 5 14 18 4 1 1 30 33 2 10 2 6 2 2 4 51 7 11 9 3 2 46 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 38 1 1 2 1 16 1 1 10 1 1 1 2 2 7 1 3 2 2 895

Percent 7.71 6.26 4.80 3.02 3.24 3.46 3.58 0.34 0.89 0.11 3.24 7.26 0.22 1.90 0.22 3.91 0.11 2.23 2.12 0.34 3.69 0.56 1.56 2.01 0.45 0.11 0.11 3.35 3.69 0.22 1.12 0.22 0.67 0.22 0.22 0.45 5.70 0.78 1.23 1.01 0.34 0.22 5.14 0.22 0.34 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.34 0.11 4.25 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.11 1.79 0.11 0.11 1.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.78 0.11 0.34 0.22 0.22 100.00

Cumulative Count 69 125 168 195 224 255 287 290 298 299 328 393 395 412 414 449 450 470 489 492 525 530 544 562 566 567 568 598 631 633 643 645 651 653 655 659 710 717 728 737 740 742 788 790 793 794 795 798 801 802 840 841 842 844 845 861 862 863 873 874 875 876 878 880 887 888 891 893 895 895

Cumulative Percent 7.71 13.97 18.77 21.79 25.03 28.49 32.07 32.40 33.30 33.41 36.65 43.91 44.13 46.03 46.26 50.17 50.28 52.51 54.64 54.97 58.66 59.22 60.78 62.79 63.24 63.35 63.46 66.82 70.50 70.73 71.84 72.07 72.74 72.96 73.18 73.63 79.33 80.11 81.34 82.35 82.68 82.91 88.04 88.27 88.60 88.72 88.83 89.16 89.50 89.61 93.85 93.97 94.08 94.30 94.41 96.20 96.31 96.42 97.54 97.65 97.77 97.88 98.10 98.32 99.11 99.22 99.55 99.78 100.00 100.00

23

5.5 How are visitor groups with children represented?

Table 2: EViews Results for School Type

SCNC provides numerous outreach programs both onsite and offsite to schools, groups, and the public. One of the questions the staff at SCNC had was to better understand the homeschooled children and their representation compared to public and private schools. Because they have greater access to school systems, they can more readily provide programs and

Tabulation of EXTRAQUESTION_2 Date: 12/07/11 Time: 12:24 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 944 Number of categories: 7 Cumulative Count 745 771 791 800 816 943 944 944 Cumulative Percent 78.92 81.67 83.79 84.75 86.44 99.89 100.00 100.00

Value <blank> Home No answer Other Private Public public, home Total

Count 745 26 20 9 16 127 1 944

Percent 78.92 2.75 2.12 0.95 1.69 13.45 0.11 100.00

information to those attending students. It was interesting to note that there were more children in the survey groups who were homeschooled (7%) than children who were in private school systems (5.5%). It was expected that the majority of children would be within the public school system (24.8% of respondents).

5.6 Visitor groups tended to be made up of mostly adults-only Although the second largest age group of visitors was children between the ages of 0-11, the majority of groups surveyed did not have children in their visitor party. The percentage actually represents the types of visitors coming to the SCNC in majority and again coincides with the primary purpose given. Collectively, 38.2% of visitor groups surveyed had children with them during their visit to the SCNC. That leaves the majority (61.8%) of visitors coming to the SCNC in strictly adult groups (18+). Although though the SCNC has a number of programs for children that are being utilized, the large majority of adult users are not taking advantage of programs and in-building activities.

24

Figure 14: EViews Results for Total Adults in Visitor Groups

Tabulation of ADULTS Date: 12/07/11 Time: 12:43 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 928 Number of categories: 6 Cumulative Count 17 558 902 920 927 928 928 Cumulative Percent 1.83 60.13 97.20 99.14 99.89 100.00 100.00

Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total

Count 17 541 344 18 7 1 928

Percent 1.83 58.30 37.07 1.94 0.75 0.11 100.00

Figure 15: EViews Results for Total Children in Visitor Groups

Tabulation of CHILDREN Date: 12/07/11 Time: 12:42 Sample (adjusted): 1 942 Included observations: 278 after adjustments Number of categories: 5 Cumulative Count 74 161 236 265 278 278 Cumulative Percent 26.62 57.91 84.89 95.32 100.00 100.00

Value 0 1 2 3 4 Total

Count 74 87 75 29 13 278

Percent 26.62 31.29 26.98 10.43 4.68 100.00

5.7 Considerations for persons with disabilities Even though the large majority of visitors reported no disabilities, the SCNC reports its accessibility to people with disabilities. In general, the majority of visitors who reported having a disability cited having a hearing impairment. Interestingly, the second largest group represented visitors reporting mobility impairment. The SCNC has many trails that are paved and is accessible to

25

wheelchairs and strollers. Although a large portion of the trails have rugged terrain and steep uphill climbs that can be unpaved. 5.8 If not by word of mouth, how do people hear about SCNC? As the survey was progressing, this question seemed to be generating the same result from respondents. Visitors were generally heard stating I have lived here all my life; I cannot really remember how I first heard about the nature center. Probably through a friend or family member or something. So it was thought this question may not produce very meaningful results. However, by taking out the response, by word of mouth, we may be able to reveal preferences on how people would have obtained the information. In general, this revealed that of the remaining 33% who cited some other response, the majority of visitors said they had learned about SCNC through a school information source. Since SCNC puts a lot of resources into school outreach and information, this would make sense and suggest that it is a viable outreach method. Additionally, the second most cited was SCNC signage (30%), meaning that it is possible that the signage from the road does indeed attract new visitors and passerby traffic. It was interesting to note that although information seekers have had a tendency to use technology more than in the past, only 8% of respondents said it was the MDC website that brought them to the SCNC.
Table 3: EViews Results for How Heard About SCNC

Tabulation of HEARABOUT Date: 12/07/11 Time: 12:38 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 880 Number of categories: 10 Cumulative Count 7 12 30 36 57 61 128 190 208 880 880 Cumulative Percent 0.80 1.36 3.41 4.09 6.48 6.93 14.55 21.59 23.64 100.00 100.00

Value Magazine Map MDC Web Site Newsletter Newspaper Other Web Site School Signage TV/Radio Word of Mouth Total

Count 7 5 18 6 21 4 67 62 18 672 880

Percent 0.80 0.57 2.05 0.68 2.39 0.45 7.61 7.05 2.05 76.36 100.00

26

5.9 Do the results correlate with the purpose of the SCNC? Again, because visitors are citing their primary purposes as hiking, jogging, exercise, etc. of the trails, it seems that many users are adults without children visiting the area for purposes possibly outside of the intended scope of the Missouri Department of Conservation. As stated in the MDC Mission, the Department exists to serve the public and facilitate their participation in resource management activities; and to provide opportunity for all citizens to use, enjoy and learn about fish, forest and wildlife resources. It seems the public appreciates the unique experience of combining outdoor interactions with exercise activities, however, are not necessarily doing so to participate in resource management activities.

5.10 Possible Bias in the results The survey was designed to select respondents at random through the use of a computer generated method. However, although not every respondent was asked if they had provided survey data before, if a visitor who had been selected for a visitor survey volunteered the information to the survey clerk, it was noted in the survey response. There were 8.85% of respondents who said they had been interviewed before. It is possible that the responses given by this group of visitors could be influencing the data and introducing a certain bias for frequent visitors.

Table 4: EViews Results for Respondents Who Had Been Interviewed Before

Tabulation of INTERVIEWED_BEFORE_ Date: 12/07/11 Time: 12:40 Sample: 1 944 Included observations: 944 Number of categories: 2 Cumulative Count 862 944 944 Cumulative Percent 91.31 100.00 100.00

Value 0 1 Total

Count 862 82 944

Percent 91.31 8.69 100.00

27

Conclusion
Much of the results generated from this survey support the fact that one of the biggest resources the SCNC has to offer is the public use of their trails. Many people both within and around Missouri come to the SCNC to experience the unique interactions that the trails offer visitors. However, I believe that this report reveals some interesting trends in visitor usage that needs to be considered both to encourage new users to the area, but additionally to better serve some of the current visitors to SCNC. Although a large percentage of visitors remain to be children between the ages of 0-11, this group does not seem to be underserved, and in fact are largely utilizing the programs and outreach activities offered by the SCNC. It seems the gap exists in providing extra resources that encourage users on the trail to utilize additional resources off the trail. A focus group was conducted alongside this survey that will hopefully help to reveal more fully the disconnect of frequent trail users and the other resources that SCNC offers. The data from this survey could prove beneficial in interpreting those results as well.

28

References MDC. Class of 2011, Missouri Department of Conservation Volunteer Handbook: Springfield Conservation Nature Center, Issued October 14, 2011

29

Appendix A

30

SCNC Interpretive Site Survey Script Click New Interview Hi, my name is______. The Missouri Department of Conservation is conducting a survey of Springfield CNC visitors to help us better serve you. Wed like to ask you a couple of questions? Check Car\Bus\Other. If, at any time they indicate that they have been interviewed before, click Before What zip code are you from? How much time have you spent here today? How many times per year do you visit Springfield Conservation Nature Center? Check 1st time if this is their first visit. How many people are in your group today? # of Adults. # of Children [under 18]. Click Continue What was your main activity here today? Did you do anything else while you were here? (only choose 2 top activities) Click Continue On a scale of 1-5 with 1 being very poor and 5 being excellent how would you rate your overall visit today? Click Continue Looking at this card, can you tell me which number best describes you? [Do this for everyone in the party.] [Use the drop boxes to collect the demographic information. Under idea click the box that represents whose idea it was to visit that day. It can be more than one person. Remember they have the option of preferring not to answer the questions.] Click Next How did you hear about us? Click Continue

31

Looking at the card again which of the following do you consider to be VERY important when visiting the Springfield Conservation Nature Center CNC? (only choose 1, 2 or 3 answers) Click Continue [Only If there are children in the party] Which best describes your childrens education? Public, private or homeschool? Click Interview Done Thank you for your help, have a great day.

If they have additional questions, answer them only if you can (i.e., you know the answer and theres not a back-up line of cars). Most of the time your response should be something like this, Id love to answer your question(s), but right now, Im a survey clerk. We have a couple of options. You are welcome to call the nature center manager or list your comment/question on this card and mail it in. (Pass out a survey card with business card attached and postage paid envelope attached.) Well be happy to answer your questions and to hear your comments. Thank you.

If visitors would like more information about why were surveying, share the following information (from the View From the Bridge January 2011 newsletter) We help people discover nature. Its one of five short and simple key messages of the Missouri Department of Conservation and it is vitally important. In order to do this successfully, we have to understand both nature and people. We are knowledgeable about the nature and conservation portion of this equation; its the helping people part that wed like to know more about. We want to learn more about our visitors including who you are, how often you visit, what kind of activities you participate in, and what is important to you. While we think we have a good idea of how to answer these questions, we dont have any current statistical information. Information about our visitors is used in planning and development, so it needs to be accurate.

At the end of the survey time click Daily Interviews Done. Fill in the comment section, who were the clerks working the survey, what the weather was like and how long you did the survey. Check the box if it was the designated tally machine; click Save and Return and take to Tamie to have the data offloaded.

32

Appendix B

33

Copy Of MasterSchedule_2
SampleDate ShiftDesc StartTime StopTime Period WeekendWeekday AM_PM 6/25/2011 June,Weekend,PM 16 17 4 Weekend PM 5/4/2011 May,Weekday,PM 16 17 3 Weekday PM 9/12/2011 September,Weekday,PM 19 20 7 Weekday PM 10/13/2011 October,Weekday,PM 15 16 8 Weekday PM 8/22/2011 August,Weekday,PM 19 20 6 Weekday PM 8/16/2011 August,Weekday,PM 12 13 6 Weekday PM 8/16/2011 August,Weekday,PM 19 20 6 Weekday PM 9/24/2011 September,Weekend,PM 13 14 7 Weekend PM 7/28/2011 July,Weekday,AM 9 10 5 Weekday AM 10/21/2011 October,Weekday,PM 12 13 8 Weekday PM 6/7/2011 June,Weekday,PM 19 20 4 Weekday PM 5/28/2011 May,Weekend,AM 10 11 3 Weekend AM 4/28/2011 April,Weekday,PM 15 16 2 Weekday PM 7/21/2011 July,Weekday,PM 18 19 5 Weekday PM 5/6/2011 May,Weekday,AM 11 12 3 Weekday AM 6/12/2011 June,Weekend,PM 17 18 4 Weekend PM 7/30/2011 July,Weekend,PM 19 20 5 Weekend PM 9/20/2011 September,Weekday,AM 11 12 7 Weekday AM 8/12/2011 August,Weekday,PM 12 13 6 Weekday PM 9/11/2011 September,Weekend,PM 18 19 7 Weekend PM 3/26/2011 March,Weekend,AM 10 11 1 Weekend AM 7/27/2011 July,Weekday,PM 19 20 5 Weekday PM 6/28/2011 June,Weekday,PM 16 17 4 Weekday PM 4/12/2011 April,Weekday,AM 11 12 2 Weekday AM 3/27/2011 March,Weekend,AM 10 11 1 Weekend AM 9/24/2011 September,Weekend,PM 16 17 7 Weekend PM 5/12/2011 May,Weekday,AM 8 93 Weekday AM 7/18/2011 July,Weekday,AM 10 11 5 Weekday AM 9/19/2011 September,Weekday,PM 18 19 7 Weekday PM 9/20/2011 September,Weekday,AM 9 10 7 Weekday AM 3/20/2011 March,Weekend,AM 9 10 1 Weekend AM 6/3/2011 June,Weekday,PM 16 17 4 Weekday PM 7/3/2011 July,Weekend,AM 9 10 5 Weekend AM 7/2/2011 July,Weekend,PM 14 15 5 Weekend PM 4/12/2011 April,Weekday,PM 19 20 2 Weekday PM 10/19/2011 October,Weekday,AM 11 12 8 Weekday AM 6/25/2011 June,Weekend,PM 15 16 4 Weekend PM

34

Copy Of MasterSchedule_2
SampleDate ShiftDesc StartTime StopTime Period WeekendWeekday AM_PM 6/5/2011 June,Weekend,PM 18 19 4 Weekend PM 10/30/2011 October,Weekend,PM 13 14 8 Weekend PM 3/20/2011 March,Weekend,PM 14 15 1 Weekend PM 9/11/2011 September,Weekend,PM 16 17 7 Weekend PM 5/20/2011 May,Weekday,AM 9 10 3 Weekday AM 3/30/2011 March,Weekday,AM 8 91 Weekday AM 6/3/2011 June,Weekday,AM 8 94 Weekday AM 4/9/2011 April,Weekend,PM 17 18 2 Weekend PM 5/14/2011 May,Weekend,PM 15 16 3 Weekend PM 10/1/2011 October,Weekend,PM 19 20 8 Weekend PM 5/1/2011 May,Weekend,AM 9 10 3 Weekend AM 4/25/2011 April,Weekday,PM 14 15 2 Weekday PM 3/17/2011 March,Weekday,PM 14 15 1 Weekday PM 5/28/2011 May,Weekend,PM 19 20 3 Weekend PM 3/10/2011 March,Weekday,PM 16 17 1 Weekday PM 3/3/2011 March,Weekday,PM 18 19 1 Weekday PM 10/13/2011 October,Weekday,AM 9 10 8 Weekday AM 4/3/2011 April,Weekend,PM 18 19 2 Weekend PM 4/24/2011 April,Weekend,PM 16 17 2 Weekend PM 10/9/2011 October,Weekend,PM 19 20 8 Weekend PM 4/17/2011 April,Weekend,PM 15 16 2 Weekend PM 10/8/2011 October,Weekend,AM 8 98 Weekend AM 7/3/2011 July,Weekend,PM 12 13 5 Weekend PM 8/27/2011 August,Weekend,AM 11 12 6 Weekend AM 8/20/2011 August,Weekend,AM 11 12 6 Weekend AM 8/14/2011 August,Weekend,AM 10 11 6 Weekend AM 8/21/2011 August,Weekend,PM 19 20 6 Weekend PM

35