2022 Socioeconomic Research of Ste. Genevieve National Historical ParkReport on 2022 Data Collection Natural Resource Report NPS/STGE/NRR—2022/XXXX Otak, Inc.,1 RRC Associates,2 Institute for Tourism & Recreation Research,3 National Park Service4 1Otak, Inc. 2RRC Associates 3Institute for Tourism & Recreation Research 4National Park Service The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible and technically accurate. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Natural Resource Publications Management website. If you have difficulty accessing information in this publication, particularly if using assistive technology, please email irma@nps.gov. Please cite this publication as: Otak, Inc. 2022. 2022 Socioeconomic research of Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park: Report on 2022 data collection. Natural Resource Report NPS/STGE/NRR—2022/XXXX. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. https://doi.org/10.36967/XXXXXXX AbstractA strong mandate and need for socioeconomic monitoring are expressed in the NPS strategic goals for science, in statements by the NPS leadership, and the report of the Second Century Commission. This mandate resulted in a pilot socioeconomic monitoring study in 2015/2016 at a sample of park units across the U.S; the current study uses outcomes from the first stage of the pilot program and progresses into a second stage of the pilot process at 24 NPS units across the United States. Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park (Ste. Genevieve NHP) was selected as one of these units. This report informs core issues of visitor use management and develops a deeper, contemporary understanding of who visits Ste. Genevieve NHP and what they do during their visit. It uses a two-phased survey methodology to capture a representative sample of visitor information, characteristics, and behavior: (1) an on-site intercept survey conducted via tablet, and (2) a follow up (mail-back and/or online survey) for full trip details. The results are organized by these two phases and are aimed to assist park managers in understanding current utilization and perception of park resources, operations and potential issues, as well as facilitating communication and decision-making processes within the park and between the park and its local partners and stakeholders. IntroductionThe National Park Service (NPS) has both a strong mandate and need for socioeconomic research. This is expressed in the NPS strategic goals for science, in statements by the NPS leadership, in the report of the Second Century Commission, NPS Next emphases, and through the Department of the Interior priorities for 2018–2022. Additionally, a recent U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report identified the needs to better understand and monitor customer experience dimensions where results more directly link to investments made. The need for socioeconomic research and monitoring also was identified in an external review of the NPS Social Science Program and supported in the 2008 Interior Appropriations Bill Joint Explanatory Statement. This mandate resulted in a pilot socioeconomic monitoring study in 2015/2016 at a sample of park units across the U.S., previously described as “Phase One.” The current study uses outcomes from the 2015/16 pilot program and progresses into “Phase Two” of the pilot process at 24 NPS units across the United States. Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park (Ste. Genevieve NHP) was selected as one of these units. Phase Two seeks to further explore visitor demographics and characteristics, applying recommendations from the 2015/16 Phase One pilot program and validating instrument and method refinements. It is part of the program aimed to collect data from in-park visitors at a broad agency level in order to best represent information needs regarding visitors across the National Park System. Data collected during the 2022 Phase Two sampling period(1) is aimed to inform individual park managers of key information about their visitors and allow for analysis of data at the agency level for future implementation. The purpose of this study is to inform core issues of visitor use management, management solutions, and to develop a current and deeper understanding of who visits Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park, what they do during their visit, and their spending profile. The results of the study are aimed to assist Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park managers in understanding current utilization and perception of park resources, operations, and issues that may exist due to increasing visitation, and facilitating communication and decision processes within the park and between the park and its local partners and stakeholders. The study was conducted by a large-scale research team from Otak, Inc., RRC Associates, and the Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research at the University of Montana. MethodsThe study used a two-phased survey methodology to capture a representative sample of visitor information, characteristics, and behavior: 1) an on-site intercept survey conducted via tablet, and 2) a follow-up (mail-back and/or online) survey for full trip details. This comprehensive two-phase approach provides the necessary information to make on-the-ground decisions using immediate feedback from the intercept survey while also capturing key in-depth information on visitor spending profiles and trip characteristics for long-term planning. Additionally, the tablet survey was kept brief to ensure the visitor’s experience was not altered. The methods also permit a larger sample to be collected on key questions of interest. Study AreaThe Ste. Genevieve NHP local area map is shown in Figure 1. The local area around Ste. Genevieve NHP consists of St. Genevieve and Perry counties in Missouri, and Randolph County in Illinois. Within Ste. Genevieve NHP, the study area was comprised of two site locations. Table 1 shows more details about sampling locations. The locations and volumes of surveyor effort were determined based on historic visitor volumes and distribution across the park’s main areas.
Sampling Period and ProcedureIntercept SurveyThe on-site intercept survey was developed to collect rapid visitor information via tablet-based responses, which were then analyzed and provided for park managers within several weeks of conclusion of data collection. This effort allowed for immediate management action if needed. At the end of the intercept survey, visitors were invited to participate in a follow-up survey by mail-back or online response. Those who agreed to participate were given an envelope containing a printed copy of the follow-up survey and hyperlink and instructions for accessing it online. As part of the intercept protocol, surveyors logged a unique identifier (four-digit code) from the envelope into the tablet for future connection to the follow-up survey. Therefore, four potential outcomes were possible when intercepting visitors (see Table 2): 1) Complete refusal, refusing to answer any questions, including non-response bias questions; 2) Partial refusal, answering non-response questions but nothing further; 3) Complete intercept, but refuse to take follow-up; 4) Complete intercept and take follow-up. During the sampling period, 2 surveyors were stationed simultaneously at different sampling sites. Start times varied day-to-day and by location to capture a diverse sample of visitors across Ste. Genevieve NHP. Each surveyor worked nine 7-hour days (six hours data collection and one-hour lunch break) and rotated between several sites. Each surveyor had one day off during the 10-day sampling window.
Mail-back/Online SurveyThe follow-up mail-back/online survey was distributed to participating respondents who completed the intercept survey and then agreed to take a follow-up survey after completing their trip to Ste. Genevieve NHP. This method extended data collection and asked participants to complete the survey after their visit either through a postage-paid envelope provided to them, or online via a provided survey link. The follow-up survey covers visitor trip spending details, travel patterns, and perceptions of their recent visit. Both the intercept survey and the follow-up survey were tagged with a unique identifier (four-digit code) for each respondent so their onsite tablet responses could be paired with their follow-up responses. Joining the two datasets provides a more complete picture of connecting in-park experiences and post-visit perceptions. At the end of the intercept survey, respondents were asked for their physical mailing address or email address. This allowed for a reminder postcard or email to be sent to all contacts about a week following the end of each data collection period. This postcard or email thanked them for their original participation and encouraged them to complete the follow-up if they had not already done so. Three weeks after postcard mailing, a second contact (with the same unique IDs) was delivered to all outstanding addresses/emails, noting that the individual’s completed questionnaire had yet to be received. The mailed survey packets included replacement surveys and postage-paid, self-addressed return envelopes. A final contact was mailed/emailed to all remaining non-respondents four weeks after sending the second contact (i.e., first full replacement survey). Table 3 shows response rate for the follow-up mail-back/online survey.
Nonresponse Bias AnalysisTo account for potential biases between respondents and nonrespondents, three questions were asked of eligible visitors contacted who did not wish to participate in the onsite intercept survey. These three questions can then be compared to both those who completed the intercept survey only, and those who completed both the intercept and follow-up surveys. With an intercept survey response rate of 96.3%, concern over intercept nonresponse is muted. Tables 4 through 6 below show results of bias testing between intercept-only and full survey respondents. Using a p-value of .05, the distribution of responses among full survey respondents and intercept-only respondents did not differ significantly across any of the non-response bias questions. Therefore, based on variables measured, this study does not have a bias due to non-response.
*p-value: 0.78
*p-value: 0.43
*p-value: 0.15
ResultsIntercept Survey ResultsThe following section provides results of the 206 visitor intercept surveys conducted in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park from August 6th-15th, 2022. All results are presented in this report, regardless of sample size, which varies by question. Caution is recommended in the interpretation of figures with sample size lower than n=30. Categories on some questions may not sum to 100% due to rounding differences and/or the opportunity to select more than one response option. Questions 1–2: Visitor Residency First, respondents were asked to indicate if they were permanent or seasonal residents of the local area around Ste. Genevieve NHP. If they did not reside permanently or seasonally in the local area, they were asked if they currently live in the U.S., and if so, for their ZIP code. Figure 2 depicts responses to this group of questions. ● Roughly one in five respondents (a combined 19%) stated that they were either permanent or seasonal residents of the local area around Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● There was a large geographic concentration of visitors from Missouri (where Ste. Genevieve NHP is located). ● Among the 99% of respondents currently residing in the U.S., 69% reside in Missouri, followed by Illinois (9%), Tennessee (3%), and Texas (3%). If respondents indicated that they were not permanent or seasonal residents of the local area, they were asked about the overall purpose for their trip away from home (Figure 3). ● For majority of non-local respondents (82%), visiting Ste. Genevieve NHP was not the primary purpose for their overall trip away from home. ● Among those respondents for whom Ste. Genevieve NHP was not their primary trip purpose, 59% stated that their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP was an incidental or spontaneous stop, while another 27% indicated that it was one of two or more equally important reasons you came to the local area. Question 4: Length of Stay If respondents indicated that they were not permanent or seasonal residents of the local area around Ste. Genevieve NHP, they were asked how many days they planned to spend within that local area, including days spent in the park. All respondents, regardless of residency, were asked whether they would be staying overnight away from their permanent residence within the local area. Responses to both of these questions are depicted in Figure 4. ● The majority of non-local respondents (82%) spent one day in the local area, while 10% spent two days, and 5% spent three days. The median length of stay was one day. ● Additionally, the majority of all respondents (80%; including permanent/seasonal residents) had not stayed or did not plan to stay away from their permanent residence in the park and/or in the local area. Questions 5-6: Overnight Visitors If respondents indicated that they stayed overnight in the local area, they were asked about the type(s) of accommodation they used or planned to use while there (Figure 5). ● The majority of overnight respondents (81%) reported staying in lodging outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park (e.g., hotels, cabins, vacation rentals, glamping). ● This was followed in prevalence by those camped outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in the local area (17%), and unpaid accommodations (e.g., family and friends) (7%). ● Among the 81% of overnight respondents who lodged outside of Ste. Genevieve NHP in the local area (per Figure 3), median length of stay was two nights. The majority of respondents (79%) lodged two nights or fewer in the local area this trip; 97% spent three nights or fewer. ● Among the 17% of overnight respondents who camped outside of Ste. Genevieve NHP (per Figure 3), median length of stay was two nights, though the majority (57%) stayed two nights. ● Among the 7% of overnight respondents who stayed in unpaid accommodations in the local area (per Figure 3), median length of stay three nights. Questions 7-9: Party Characteristics Respondents were asked to indicate how many adults (18 or older) and children (under 18) were in their personal group during their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP (Figure 7). A personal group was defined as the visitor and companions with whom they visited the park, such as a spouse, family, and/or friends, but visitors were informed not to account for the larger group with whom they may have traveled, such as a school, church, scout, or tour group. ● The median number of adults per group was two. Most groups (64%) included two adults. ● Most groups (81%) did not include any children. Respondents were then asked to provide the age of each member of their group (Figure 8). ● The most common age of the adults and children in a personal group was 65 years or older (34%), followed by 50-64 years old (32%), and 30-49 years old (24%). ● Children (i.e., visitors under 18 years old) accounted for a combined total of just 7% of group members. Questions 11-12: Local Communities To build a more detailed understanding of the impact of Ste. Genevieve NHP on the surrounding local area, respondents were given a list of nearby communities and asked which one(s), if any, they had already visited or planned to visit during their trip. Visiting a community was defined as stopping to do or buy anything, such as purchasing gas or groceries or dining. Those respondents who had previously indicated that they were staying overnight in the local area outside Ste. Genevieve NHP (i.e., paid lodging outside the park, camping outside the park, or staying in unpaid accommodation outside the park) were then asked which local community (or communities) from that list was (or were) closest to their accommodations. Responses to both of these questions are shown in Figure 9, below. ● One in five respondents (20%) stated that they had already visited or planned to visit St. Louis, MO while in the local area. This was followed by 11% who reported visiting or planning to visit Cape Girardeau, MO, and 8% who visited Perryville, MO. Nearly half of respondents (47%), reported that they did not plan to visit any communities in the local area. ● Of the limited number of respondents who reported the closest community to where they stayed while in the local area, the majority of respondents (60%) reported staying in Perryville, MO. Questions 13-15: Park Use Characteristics First, respondents were asked to indicate if they planned to visit Ste. Genevieve NHP for more than one day, and then a series of follow-up questions about the length of time they might spend in the park (Figure 10 and Table 7).
● While visiting Ste. Genevieve NHP, most visitors (87%) did not plan to spend more than one day in the park. ● Among the 87% of visitors who did not spend more than a day in Ste. Genevieve NHP, just over half (56%) planned to spend one hour or more in the park. The median length of time spent in the park among this group was three hours. ● The remaining 13% of visitors planned to visit for more than one day; among those visitors, the median length of stay was two days. ● Those respondents who spent at least one day in the park were also asked on how many different days they expected to enter the park; the median answer was two days. Respondents were also presented with a list of locations within Ste. Genevieve NHP and asked to indicate if they had been to, or planned to visit them, that day (Figure 11). ● The most commonly visited location in Ste. Genevieve NHP was the Welcome Center (90% of respondents had either been there or planned to visit it on their trip), followed by Jean Baptiste Valle House (67%) and the Green Tree Tavern (11%). ● The Bauvais-Amoureux House was the least-visited location from the list provided, with only 8% of respondents reporting having visited or planning to visit. Question 16: Transportation Visitors were asked about the form of transportation they used to enter Ste. Genevieve NHP on the day they were surveyed (Figure 12). ● The majority of respondents (95%) reported that they used their car, truck, or SUV to enter Ste. Genevieve NHP on the day of the survey. ● This was followed distantly by those who walked/hiked into the park (2%), those using RVs or motorhomes (1%), and motorcycles (1%). If respondents entered the park using a multi-passenger private vehicle (i.e., car, truck or SUV; recreational vehicle or motorhome; or motorcycle), they were asked to indicate how many people were travelling in or on that vehicle (Figure 13). ● The majority of respondents traveling by car reported two people (59%). The next common group size was one person (13%), followed by three people (11%). ● Two thirds of respondents entering Ste. Genevieve NHP by RV/motorhome reported travelling in a group of two (67%), followed by one person (33%). ● The motorcyclists (100%) were traveling in pairs when entering Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● For both the RV/motorhome and motorcyclist response categories, results should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size for each group. Question 18: Previous Visits to Ste. Genevieve NHP Respondents were asked if they were first time visitors to Ste. Genevieve NHP. Repeat visitors were then asked how many visits they have made to Ste. Genevieve NHP in the last 12 months and the last five years (Figure 14). ● Most respondents (55%) were on their first ever trip to Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● Among the 45% of respondents who were repeat visitors, the majority (59%) were on their first visit in the past 12 months (i.e., had last visited more than a year ago). ● However, the majority of repeat visitors (74%) had visited at least one prior time in the past 5 years (i.e., those with two or more visits in the past five years). ● The median number of visits made in the past five years was three, including the current trip; 15% of repeat visitors had made more than 10 visits in the past five years. Question 19: Previous Visits to Other NPS Units Finally, respondents were asked how many visits they made to other NPS sites over the past 12 months (Figure 15). ● The majority of respondents (64%) had made at least one visit to other NPS site(s) in the past year. The other 36% of respondents reported they had not made a visit in the past 12 months. ● The median number of visits made to other NPS site(s) in the past 12 months was one, though a combined 34% had made three or more visits in the past year. Follow-up Survey ResultsThe following section provides results of the 35 follow-up visitor surveys received by mail-back or online following fieldwork conducted in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in Summer of 2022. Again, caution is recommended in the interpretation of figures with sample size lower than n=30, and categories on some questions may not sum to 100% due to rounding differences and/or the opportunity to select more than one response option. Questions 1–2: Information about Ste. Genevieve NHP First, respondents were asked what sources they used to obtain information about Ste. Genevieve NHP prior to their trip, and whether they had the information they needed on their trip (Figure 16). ● The most used resource for respondents were previous visits they had made to the park, with 37% of respondents reportedly using it. The second most common source was friends/relatives/word of mouth (23%), followed by “Other” (20%, see accompanying document for more information on this category), the official Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park website (17%), and other websites (14%). ● Roughly one in five visitors (17%) reported that they did not obtain information prior to their visit to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park. ● In a follow-up question, 94% of respondents said that they had the information about Ste. Genevieve NHP that they needed on their trip, while 6% indicated that there was information that they needed but did not have. ● In an open-ended follow-up question, those who did not have the information they needed on this trip were asked to elaborate. These comments are provided as an accompanying document for review. Question 3: Transportation While in the intercept survey, respondents indicated a mode of transportation they used to enter the park on the day of the intercept, the follow-up survey asked respondents to select all forms of transportation they personally used to travel from their home to Ste. Genevieve NHP on their trip (Figure 17). ● Nearly all respondents (94%) used a personal vehicle, such as a car, truck, or SUV, at some point during their trip from home to Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● The second most common mode of travel was an airplane (9%), followed by RV or motorhomes (6%). Question 4: Travel Party Composition Respondents were asked what type of group they were with during their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP on the day of the survey (Figure 18). ● Close to half of respondents (47%) visited Ste. Genevieve NHP with their significant other or spouse on the day of the survey. ● Roughly one-third of respondents (35%) explored Ste. Genevieve NHP with their family, 9% visited the park with their friends, and the remaining 9% of respondent were alone. Question 10: Entrance Fees Respondents were asked to indicate which type of entrance fees applied to them personally on their most recent trip to Ste. Genevieve NHP2 (Figure 19). In this case, STGE does not have entrance fees, but the question was kept in as a similar survey was conducted in various other historic parks during the year of sampling. While not applicable directly to STGE’s planning, understanding visitor perceptions about whether they used a fee was found to provide useful insights. ● The majority of respondents (66%) reported they did not pay a fee or use a pass to enter Ste. Genevieve NHP. Respondents were given the choice to state that they “did not pay a fee or use a pass” but a couple of respondents still selected some type of fee option. ● Nearly one in five respondents (22%) reported using some type of annual pass, such as a Senior Pass, Access Pass, Military Pass, or an America the Beautiful annual pass to enter the park. This is interesting as the park does not require a fee, but we can infer that users who had a pass may have said they used it since they know they had access to it. Questions 12-14: Trip Characteristics Respondents were asked if they visited other National Park Service sites on their trip away from home (Figure 20). Questions 15–16: Reasons to Visit Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of various reasons to visit Ste. Genevieve NHP on their trip, then asked which of those was the most important reason for them to visit Ste. Genevieve NHP (Figure 22). ● Nearly half of visitors chose learning more about American history and culture (44%) as an extremely important reason for their trip to Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● Other important reasons were to spend time with family/friends and to visit a National Park Service site (32% and 26% of respondents, respectively, rated them as extremely important). ● Nearly half of visitors chose learning more about American history and culture (44%) as an extremely important reason for their trip to Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● Other important reasons were to spend time with family/friends and to visit a National Park Service site (32% and 26% of respondents, respectively, rated them as extremely important). Questions 17–19: Programs, Services, and Learning Respondents were asked to identify all programs and services that they personally participated in in Ste. Genevieve NHP during their trip (Figure 23). ● The two most-used programs and/or services were going to a welcome/visitor center and viewing indoor exhibits, with nearly three quarters of respondents (74%) reporting participating in each of them. ● Several other programs were engaged in by over half of respondents: talking informally with a ranger (71%) and viewing outdoor exhibits (60%). Two follow-up questions asked if respondents learned anything from park staff, programs, and/or exhibits about American history, nature, and/or culture, and what specific subjects they would like to learn about in the future (Figure 24). ● The majority of respondents (69%) reported that they learned something from park staff, programs, and/or exhibits about American history, nature, and/or culture. ● One third of respondents (33%) reported that if they were to visit Ste. Genevieve NHP in the future, there are specific subjects they would like to learn about. ● Respondents who said yes to either of these two questions were asked to elaborate. These comments are provided as an accompanying document for review. Questions 20–21: Use of Devices Two survey questions were focused on the use of electronic devices, their importance, and the quality of service provided. First, respondents were asked which personal electronic devices they used while in Ste. Genevieve NHP ● Over half of respondents reported sending/receiving a text message (53%) and sharing pics/videos/audio via social media (52%) while in the park. ● Conversely, there were no respondents who listened to or used an NPS podcast. However, STGE does not offer an official podcast that can be listened to while at the park either. ● The most important device uses were GPS/Navigation and sending/receiving text messages (34% and 33% of respondents, respectively, rated them as extremely important). ● Listening to and using an NPS podcast was not rated as extremely important by any of the respondents, and not at all important by 82% of respondents. ● Sending/receiving a text message was rated as very good or good by 30% and 22% of respondents, respectively. There were no respondents who reported that they had no service for this. Another 25% of respondents reported that the quality of service for GPS/Navigation was also rated as very good. ● For each category, respondents were most likely to report that the quality of the service was not applicable to them during their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP, with at least one third of respondents selecting that response. Question 22: Physical Difficulties Respondents were asked if anyone in their personal group had a physical condition that made it difficult to access or participate in park activities or services during their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP. If such condition was identified, respondents were asked to specify the type of difficulty (Figure 28). ● The majority of respondents (94%) reported that nobody in their personal group had a physical condition that made it difficult to access or participate in park activities or services during their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP. ● Among the 6% of visitors who identified at least one difficulty, both reported mobility issues in their group, with the one respondent also reporting hearing and/or visual difficulties. Questions 25-28: Visitor Experience Respondents were asked if their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP met their expectations (Figure 29). ● The majority of respondents (85%) reported that their visit to Ste. Genevieve NHP met their expectations, while 15% of respondents said it did not meet their expectations entirely, and no respondents indicated that it did not meet their expectations at all. ● In an open-ended follow-up question, respondents who indicated that Ste. Genevieve NHP did not meet their expectations were asked to elaborate. These comments are provided as an accompanying document for review. Respondents were then given several statements about Ste. Genevieve NHP and asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each given statement (Figure 30). ● From all the statements listed, “Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park is a safe place to visit” received the most consensus with a combined 86% of respondents saying they either strongly or somewhat agree with it. That was followed by “Historical and cultural features in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park are well maintained/preserved” and “Natural resources in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park are in pristine condition” (80% and 54% of respondents, respectively, strongly or somewhat agreed with these statements). ● Conversely, “Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park is too crowded” and “Development of adjacent areas detracts from visitors’ experience at Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park” received the least support, with less than 10% of respondents either somewhat or strongly agreeing with these statements, and the majority of respondents either strongly or somewhat disagreeing with each of them. ● As highlighted earlier, Ste. Genevieve does not have an entrance fee, but the question around fee pricing was left in for consistency to other parks as it still had a “don’t know” option. Next, respondents were asked to rate the quality of park facilities, visitor services, and recreational opportunities in Ste. Genevieve NHP (Figure 31). ● Over half of visitors (ranging from 51% to 71%) rated the Visitor Center, assistance from park employees, park maps or brochures, exhibits (indoor and outdoor), and restrooms as very good. ● Conversely, fewer than half of visitors rated learning about nature, history, or culture, value for entrance fee paid, walkways, trails, and roads, ranger programs, commercials services in the park, outdoor recreation, and campgrounds and/or picnic areas as very good. For these ratings categories, visitors were most likely to say that they were either rated as good or not available or they did not use them. Finally, respondents were asked to rate overall quality of the park facilities, visitor services, and recreation opportunities (Figure 33). ● Follow-up survey respondents were slightly more likely to be women than men, though the sample was relatively balanced (51% vs 49%). ● The most common age categories were 65-74 years old (39%), 55-64 years old (24%), and 45-54 years old (24%). The least represented age group were those 75 years or older (only 12% of the participants surveyed). There were no respondents who returned the mail-back survey under the age of 45. ● Most survey respondents were well educated, with a combined 62% having some college degree, and roughly one quarter (27%) holding an advanced degree (i.e., Master’s, MD, DD, PhD, EdD). Respondents were also asked to identify their race(s) and if they were of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish Origin (Figure 34). ● All respondents (100%) were White. ● In addition, all respondents (100%) were not of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin. At a household level, respondents were asked to report annual income and number of contributors, as well as how many people (adults and children) live in their household (Figure 35). ● The majority of respondents (64%) had two people in their household, followed by three to five people (another 27%). ● Roughly one quarter of respondents (23%) reported that their annual household income was between $75,000 to $99,999, and another 17% earned $100,000 to $149,999. Roughly one quarter of respondents (23%) did not wish to provide an annual household income. ● Most respondents (81%) came from a dual-income household. Finally, respondents were asked about their language preference (Figure 36). Appendix A: Accessible TablesThis appendix contains accessible tables with data from figures found in the body of the report. Table captions include hyperlinks to the corresponding figures. Table A-1. Data from Figure 6. Number of nights spent in the local area around Ste. Genevieve NHP, by accommodation type.
Table A-3. Data from Figure 13. Number of people in respondent’s vehicle when entering Ste. Genevieve NHP.
Table A-11. Data from Figure 31. Rating the quality of Ste. Genevieve NHP facilities, visitor services, and recreational opportunities.
Appendix B: Intercept SurveyThis appendix contains the text version of the intercept survey administered via tablet in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park from August 6th – 15th, 2022. Visitors were asked questions verbally by an interviewer, and responses were entered in a tablet form. Intercept Survey – Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park National Park Interviewer script: Hello, I am working with Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park conducting a 5-minute survey to improve visitor experiences in the park. Are you a park employee, or have you or anyone in your personal travel group taken a Visitor Survey at Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park recently? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · No - visitor is eligible for survey · Yes - previously participated in survey · Yes - park employee · Language barrier / unable to communicate · Ineligible for another reason – please specify (text field)
(If visitor is eligible for the survey) May I ask you some questions about your Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park experience? (Multiple choice, please choose one) · Yes · No
(If the visitor answers yes, read the following script): Before we begin, I would like to let you know that this survey has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget. It is important to note that a Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it has a valid OMB control number. The control number for this collection is 1024-0224 and this number is valid through 5/31/2023. Secondly, your participation is voluntary, and your name will never be connected with your individual responses. This survey will only take about five minutes of your time today.
(If the visitor answers no, read the following script): Ok, would you please answer just three short questions for us? (Multiple choice, please choose one) · Yes · No (If the visitor answers no, thank them for their time)
(If the visitor answers yes, ask the non-response bias questions) Are you a permanent or seasonal resident of the local area around Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes · No Do you currently live in the United States? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes · No On this trip away from home, have you stayed, or will you stay overnight away from your permanent residence within the local area? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes · No
(If the visitor agrees to take the full survey, read the following survey questions): 1) Are you a permanent or seasonal/second home resident of the local area around Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes, I am a permanent resident o (If answer is yes) What is your ZIP Code in the local area? (text field) · Yes, I am a seasonal/second home resident o (If answer is yes) What is your ZIP Code in the local area? (text field) · No, I am not a permanent or seasonal resident of the local area around Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park 2) (If respondent is not a permanent or seasonal resident) Do you currently live in the United States? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · No o (If answer is no) What is your country of origin? (select country from drop-down list) · Yes o (If answer is yes) What is the ZIP code of your permanent residence? (text field) 3) (If respondent is not a permanent or seasonal resident) Was your visit to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park the primary purpose for your overall trip away from home? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes · No o (If answer is no) Was your visit to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park …? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) - The primary reason you came to the local area - One of two or more equally important reasons you came to the local area - An incidental or spontaneous stop 4) (If respondent is not a permanent or seasonal resident) How many days are you planning to spend in the local area (including the days you spend in Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park) on this trip away from home? · Number of days (text field) 5) On this trip away from home, have you stayed, or will you stay overnight away from your permanent residence within the local area? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes · No 6) (If respondent is staying overnight) On this trip, what type of accommodations do you expect to use while in the local area? (Multiple choice, please choose all that apply) · Camping outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in the local area o Number of nights (text field) · Lodging outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in the local area (e.g., hotels, cabins, vacation rentals) o Number of nights (text field) · Unpaid accommodations (e.g., family and friends) o Number of nights (text field) 7) Including yourself, how many people are in your personal group as you visit Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? Note: Your personal group is you and companions with whom you visited Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park on this trip, such as a spouse, family, friends, etc. This does not include the larger group that you might have traveled with, such as a school, church, scout, or tour group. (choices below) · Number of adults (text field) · Number of children (text field) 8) What are the ages of each of the adults in your group? Note: ages will be collected for a max of 6 adults per group. · Age of respondent (text field) · Age of adult 2 (text field) · Age of adult 3 (text field) · Age of adult 4 (text field) · Age of adult 5 (text field) · Age of adult 6 (text field) 9) (If at least 1 child is in the group) What are the ages of each of the children in your group? Note: ages will be collected for a max of 6 children per group · Age of child 1 (text field) · Age of child 2 (text field) · Age of child 3 (text field) · Age of child 4 (text field) · Age of child 5 (text field) · Age of child 6 (text field) 10) Including yourself, how many people in your personal group split the trip expenses? · Number of people (text field) 11) Which communities have you already visited or do you plan to visit outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park while in the local area? (In other words, did you stop to do anything or buy anything [e.g., gas, groceries, dining] in any of the following?) (Multiple choice, please choose all that apply) · Saint Mary, MO · Perryville, MO · Farmington, MO · St. Louis, MO · Festus, MO · Arnold, MO · Bloomsdale, MO · Cape Girardeau, MO · Chester, IL · Modoc, IL · Other – please specify (text field) · Don’t know · I do not plan to visit any communities in the local area 12) (If respondent answers Question 11 with anything other than “I do not plan to visit any communities” or “Don’t know”, and if the respondent is staying overnight in the local area, ask the following question) What communities are closest to where you stayed or are staying at your accommodation(s) outside Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in the local area (Multiple choice, please choose all that apply) · Saint Mary, MO · Perryville, MO · Farmington, MO · St. Louis, MO · Festus, MO · Arnold, MO · Bloomsdale, MO · Cape Girardeau, MO · Chester, IL · Modoc, IL · Other – please specify (text field) 13) On this trip, do you plan to visit Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park for more than one day? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes o (If answer is yes) How many days do you plan to spend within Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park on this trip? - Number of days (text field) o (If answer is yes) On how many different days do you expect to enter the park? - Number of different days entered Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park (text field) · No o (If answer is no) Do you plan to spend one hour or more within Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park today? (Multiple choice, please choose one) - Yes · (If answer is yes) How many hours do you plan to spend within Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park today? o Number of hours (text field) - No · (If answer is no) How many minutes do you plan to spend within Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park today? o Number of minutes (text field) 14) Did you, or do you plan to, leave and re-enter the park today? (Multiple choice, please choose one response) · Yes o (If answer is yes) How many times? - Number of times (text field) · No 15) Considering your visit today, have you been to, or do you plan to visit any of the following locations within Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? (Multiple choice, please choose all that apply) · Welcome Center · Jean Baptiste Valle House · Green Tree Tavern · Bauvais-Amoureux House 16) Which of the following forms of transportation did you personally use to enter Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? (Multiple choice, please choose one) · Car, truck, or SUV (e.g., standard private vehicle) o (If answer is car, truck or SUV) Number of people in vehicle (text field) · Recreational vehicle or motorhome o (If answer is recreational vehicle or motorhome) Number of people in vehicle (text field) · Taxi/rideshare · Commercial tour bus · Commercial tour van · School bus or church bus/van · Train or long-distance passenger bus · Bicycle · Electric bicycle · Electric scooter · Motorcycle o (If answer is motorcycle) Number of people in vehicle (text field) · Walk/hike · Other – Please specify (text field) 17) (If respondent selected commercial tour bus or commercial tour van) Was your commercial tour bus or tour van booked as a package vacation? (Multiple choice, please choose one) · Yes o (If answer is yes) What is the total cost of the package vacation for your personal group? - Dollar amount (text field) o (If answer is yes) What is the total length of your package vacation? - Number of days (text field) o (If answer is yes) Did your package vacation include lodging (e.g., hotels, lodges, house)? (Multiple choice, please choose one) - Yes - No - Unsure o How many people in your personal group were on the package vacation? - Number of people (text field) · No 18) Are you a first-time visitor to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park? (Multiple choice, please choose one) · Yes · No o (If answer is no) Including this visit, how many visits have you made to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park over the past 12 months? - Number of visits (text field) o (If answer is no) Including this visit, how many visits have you made to Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park over the past five years? - Number of visits (text field) 19) How many visits have you made to other NPS sites over the past 12 months? · Number of visits (text field) Interviewer script: Thank you for your time. To record a more complete picture of your Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park visit, we ask you to please take this mail-back survey and complete it after your trip. You can participate either by completing the paper form and mailing it in the postage-paid envelope, or online through a password-protected website. The website information is provided on a slip of paper inside the survey packet. Because your opinion is important to us, we send replacement surveys if you lost your survey and reminders if you forgot to complete it when you returned home. Would you be willing to share your home address or email to send a reminder or replacement survey in the following weeks? Your information is confidential, and your results will be only reported in the aggregate. · First name (text field) · Address (text field) · Email (text field)
|
Last updated: July 31, 2023