71-23169 CAJUCOM, Edilberto Zalvidea, 1934
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
I I 71-23,169 CAJUCOM, Edilberto Zalvidea, 1934- MICHIGAN SUMMER TRAIL USERS: A PILOT STUDY OF USER PATTERNS AND CHARACTERISTICS. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1971 Agriculture, forest recreation University Microfilm s, A XEROXC o m p a n y , Ann Arbor, Michigan MICHIGAN SUMMER TRAIL USERS: A PILOT STUDY OF USER PATTERNS AND CHARACTERISTICS By Edilberto Zalvidea Cajucom A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1971 PLEASE NOTE: Some pages have small and indistinct type. Filmed as received. University Microfilms ABSTRACT MICHIGAN SUMMER TRAIL USERS: A PILOT STUDY OF USER PATTERNS AND CHARACTERISTICS By Edilberto Zalvidea Cajucom This study was primarily concerned with obtaining preliminary indications of summer recreational trail use patterns and user socio-economic characteristics in Michigan. The information developed in this study may prove useful in the management, development, and adminis tration of recreation areas. Also, the information may serve as a guide in deciding on the equitable allocation of land for various recreational pursuits. An objective of the study was also to test the use of self—administered questionnaires as a means of gathering data. In data collection, eleven survey stations were selected in various parts of the state. These stations were all within the jurisdictional areas of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the United States Forest Service and were mostly concentrated along the Michigan Riding and Hiking Trail. At each of these unmanned stations a sign and a box containing Edilberto Zalvidea Cajucom questionnaires were installed at the trailhead. The survey was conducted from June 15 to September 30, 1969. No moti vational technique nor administrative encouragement was employed in eliciting response from trail users. The pur pose was to test and evaluate the degree of responsiveness of trail users in filling out questionnaires on a purely voluntary basis. Respondents of age eleven or above were asked to complete the questionnaire. Only one member of each family was requested to respond. Personal interviews of both respondents and nonrespondents were conducted to ascertain the reliability and validity of the data ob tained. The information obtained was coded, and processed using data processing equipment. Descriptive and sta tistical analyses were completed. In general, hiking and horseback riding appear to be the predominant methods of travel used on trails. Motorcycling or motorbiking and bicycling were lightly represented. Trail users were composed of younger age groups in both hiking and riding pursuits. "One family and children" and "groups of friends" were the predominant group composition. Trail user heads of families were mostly professionals with seventeen or more years of education and had an annual income of $10,000 or more. In the statistical analyses of data, testing differences between proportions reveal significant Edilberto Zalvidea Cajucom differences in selected variables in seven out of nine survey stations. It showed that sex, age, camping partici pation, education, professional occupation, and annual income were significantly different between users of two stations. Significant differences were also found in the case of other variables such as place of residence of users, availability of camping opportunities, and user's group composition. In the chi-square analysis tests of significance, significant differences were found between variables such as method of travel, age, sex, reasons for choosing trail, camping frequency, group composition, trail use fre quency, occupation, and education of users. Response on self-administered questionnaires, except for two survey stations (Ludington and Pinckney), was not believed very substantial in this study. This could be attributable to some factors such as lack of motivational technique or publicity, excessive length of the questionnaire used, ineffective administration of the questionnaire, short duration of the study, difficulty of some questions asked or probably mere apathy on the part of trail users. On the average, only two out of ten trail users filled out questionnaires at the five locations observed. However, it is believed that the study gives some indications of trail use patterns and user charac teristics in the state of Michigan. AC KNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to all those, who in one way or another, have contributed to the successful completion of this disser tation. To Dr. Michael Chubb, major professor, thesis advisor, and Director of the Recreation Research and Planning Unit, goes my heartfelt appreciation for his untiring guidance in all phases of the study. His en couragement, active involvement, allotment of research funds, and making available the assistance of the Recre ation Research and Planning Unit's staff, were largely responsible for the realization of this study. I would also like to officially and personally convey my debt of gratitude to Dr. Raleigh Barlowe (Chair man, Department of Resource Development) who was mainly responsible for my coming to this university. His under standing and generosity in various ways including ex tension of assistantship have had an immense influence upon my education and life. Sincere appreciation also goes to Professor Louis F. Twardzik (Chairman, Department of Park and Recreation Resources) for the department's support of this project and for his counsel in the early stage of my course w o r k . To the members of my Guidance Committee, Drs. Milton H. Steinmueller, Daniel E. Chappelle, and Donald P. White, I express my appreciation for their patience, gui dance, and constructive evaluation of my courses and program of study in general. To the cooperating agencies, specifically the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the United States Forest Service (Cadillac, Michigan), their sincere help and support in the most difficult phase of the study (data collection) are gratefully acknowledged. Special thanks are also extended to the following individuals: Louis L. Lanier, for his assistance in practically all the phases of the study from questionnaire design to data collection. Dr. Dennis C. Gilliland (Department of Statistics and Probability), for suggestions and guidance in the sta tistical design and analysis of data. John Kohmetscher, John Teeter, William Allard, and James Mullin (Applications Programming Unit, Michigan State University Computer Laboratory), for programming and processing of various data. William H. Colburn and James Oakwood of the Recre ation Resource Planning Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, for assistance in the study plan and reproduction of materials included in Appendix A. Paul Rearick, Charles Leeson, James Hine of the Parks Division; Paul Brigham of the Forestry Division, and other members of the Michigan Department of Natural Re sources particularly the field staff, for the construction of questionnaire boxes and the administration and retrieval of the completed questionnaires. Edwin Youngblood, Wayne Worthington, Ronald Scott, and Myron Smith of the United States Forest Service, for their cooperation and invaluable support. Paul Schneider of the Department of Resource Development for his generous help in the graphs and illustrations included here. Lastly, 1 would like to acknowledge the untiring assistance of my wife, Guadalupe. Her patience, dedi cation, and encouragement have been an inspiration especially under the most trying circumstances. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION .................................. 1 Objectives .................................. 3 Significance of the Study ................. 4 Scope and Limitations of the Study . 6 Survey of Similar Studies in Other States. 8 Selection of Study Areas ................. 11 Assumptions.............................. 12 H y p o t h e s e s .............................. 13 Sub-hypotheses.......................... 14 Definitions of Terms U s e d ............. 15 II. DATA COLLECTION AND PREPARATION......... 18 Questionnaire Design.................... 18 Pre-testing of Questionnaires......... 20 Questionnaire Box Design and Installation. 21 Questionnaire Administration and Maintenance.............................. 25 Observations and Personal Interviews . 27 Location and Description of Study Areas . 31 L o c a t i o n .............................. 31 Description of Stations in the National Forest................................. 37 Description of Stations in the State Forest................................. 39 Description of Stations in State Parks . 42 Coding and Processing of Completed Questionnaires ........................... 46 III. GENERAL PROFILE OF TRAIL USERS ............. 51 Method of Travel ....................... 51 Age and Sex .............................. 52 Camping Participation .................... 52 Choice of T r a i l ....................... 54 Recreational Activities Along the Trail . 56 v Chapter Page Group Composition ............................ 58 Time of U s e ................................... 60 Method of Trail Travel in Past Twelve Months. ............ 62 Associated Activities in Past Twelve Months. ........................ 64 Number of Times Trail Used in Past Twelve M o n t h s .......................................... 65 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Fam i l y .........................................