Monitoring visitor flows in destinations: The case of multiple-use hiking trails in grand canyon national park

Tourism Analysis

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 749-763

  Schwartz, Zvi ^a   Stewart, William ^a   Backlund, Erik A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Calibration technique; Park planning; Time and motion study; Visitor counts

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893592922     PISSN: 10835423     EISSN: 19433999     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3727/108354210X12645141401142     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Arneberger, A., Haider, W., & Brandenburg, C. (2005). Evaluating visitor-monitoring techniques: A comparison of counting and video observation data. Environmental Management, 36, 317-327.
2. Arneberger, A., & Hinterberger, B. (2003). Visitor monitoring methods for managing public use pressures in the Danube Floodplains National Park, Austria. Journal for Nature Conservation, 11, 260-267.
3. Brown, P., & Haas, G. (1980). Wilderness recreation experiences: The Rawah case. Journal of Leisure Research, 12, 229-41.
4. Cessford, G., & Muhar, A. (2003). Monitoring options for visitor numbers in national parks and natural areas. Journal of Nature Conservation, 11, 240-250.
5. Cole, D. (1996). Wilderness recreational use trends 1965 through 1994 (Intermountain Research Station Research Paper, INT-RP-488). Odgen, UT: USDA Forest Service.
6. Cole, D., & Daniel, T. (2003). The science of visitor management in parks and protected areas: From verbal reports to simulation models. Journal of Nature Conservation, 11, 269-277.
7. Cope, A., Doxford, D., & Probert, C. (2000). Monitoring visitors to UK countryside resources: The approaches of land and recreation resource management organizations to visitor monitoring. Land Use Policy, 17, 59-66.
8. Driver, B., Brown, P., Stankey, G., & Gregoire, T. (1987). The ROS planning system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed. Leisure Science, 9, 201-12.
9. Gregoire, T., & Buhyoff, G. (1999). Sampling and estimating recreational use (USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-TGR-456). Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Research Station.
10. Kaczynski, A., Crompton, J., & Emerson, J. (2003). A procedure for improving the accuracy of visitor counts at state parks. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 21, 140-151.
11. Loomis, J. (2000). Counting on recreation use data: A call for long-term monitoring. Journal of Leisure Research, 32, 93-96.
12. Manning, R. (2007). Parks and carrying capacity: Commons without tragedy. Covelo, CA: Island Press.
13. Manning, R., Valliere, W., Wang, B., & Jacobi, C. (1999). Crowding norms: Alternative measurement approaches. Leisure Sciences, 21, 219-29.
14. National Park Service. (1995). VERP: The visitor experience and resource protection framework-A handbook for planners and managers. Denver, CO: Denver Service Center.
15. Shelby, B., & Harris, R. (1985). Comparing methods for determining visitor evaluations of ecological impacts: Site visits, photographs, and written descriptions. Journal of Leisure Research, 17, 57-67.
16. Stankey, G., Cole, D., Lucas, R., Peterson, M., Frissell, S., & Washburne, R. (1985). The limits of acceptable change (LAC) system for wilderness planning (General Technical Report INT-176). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service.
17. Stewart, W., & Cole, J. (1997). Bright Angel Trail dayhiker study: A preliminary investigation. Report submitted to Grand Canyon National Park.
18. Watson, A., Cole, D., Turner, D., & Reynolds, P. (2000). Wilderness recreation use estimation: A handbook of methods (General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-56). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station.
19. Watson, A., Cronn, R., & Christensen, N. (1998). Monitoring inter-group encounters in wilderness (Research Paper RMRS-RP-14). Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
20. Watson, A., Niccolucci, M., & Williams, D. (1992). The nature of conflict between hikers and recreational stock users in the John Muir Wilderness. Journal of Leisure Research, 26, 372-85.