ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS UTILIZATION STUDY, STAGE I
VISITOR USE AND PROFILE SURVEY REPORT Volume II -- General Summary: Volume, Value and Trip Characteristics
Presented To: Travel Alberta and
Canada/Alberta Tourism Agreement (CATA)
ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS UTILIZATION STUDY, STAGE I
VISITOR USE AND PROFILE SURVEY REPORT
Volume n - General Summcoy:
Volume, Value and Trip Characteristics
Presented To: Travel Alberta and
Canada/Alberta Tourism Agreement (CATA)
Presented By: Ruston/Tomany & Associates, Ltd.
February, 1989
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
FOREWORD
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Travel Alberta commissioned Ruston/Tomany & Associates to conduct Stage I of the National Parks Utilization Study^. The first stage of this two stage project was designed to provide a data base on visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks. The data base will be used in preparing a marketing and development plan for the future of the parks (Stage II) .
The original Terms of Reference encompassed only the two Alberta Parks — Banff National Park and Jasper National Park. In order to provide information on the Rocky Mountain National Parks as a whole (Banff, Jasper, Yoho, and Kootenay National Parks) , cooperation and funding from the British Columbia Ministry of Tourism and Provincial Secretary were obtained. The study parameters were then extended to capture limited infor- mation on visitors to Yoho and Kootenay National Parks.
To facilitate the study design, implementation and analy- sis phases, a Steering Committee was created by Travel Alberta. This body, under the leadership of Travel Alberta research personnel, undertook a consulting and decision-making role
^Under the terms of the Joint Federal/Provincial Sub-Agreement No. 0343.
(i)
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
throughout the two years required to complete the study. Organizations represented on the Steering Committee included:
*Travel Alberta
♦British Columbia Ministry of Tourism and Provincial Secretary
Tourism Development, Department of Regional Industrial Expansion ♦Canadian Parks Service ♦Statistics Canada
Banff - Lake Louise Chamber of Commerce
Jasper Chamber of Commerce ♦Ruston/Tomany & Associates
A Technical Committee (*) was struck from the full Steer- ing Committee to deal with complex methodological issues as they arose throughout the course of the study. Decisions regarding sampling, weighting and estimation procedures were discussed and approved by the Technical Committee prior to implementation by Ruston/Tomany & Associates. In view of the number of such decisions that occur in a study of the scope and complexity of the Visitor Use and Profile Survey, the Technical Committee proved invaluable in meeting the high quality objectives of the study.
The specific objectives of the Visitor Use and Profile Survey included the following:
• Measure the volume and value of visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks system in total and to Banff and Jasper National Parks separately;
(ii)
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
I I
1-^
• Obtain detailed market information on trip and traveller characteristics;
• Determine current use of facilities, services, attractions, activities and events in the parks, including interpretive and educational programs and facilities; and
• Identify motivations for visiting the parks, and attitudes and perceptions regarding park experiences.
Although Travel Alberta had conducted surveys with exiting visitors in the past, the Visitor Use and Profile Survey was the first study initiated by the province to require four season fieldwork. This requirement was included in the Terms of Ref- erence because of the importance of winter recreational acti- vity, and particularly downhill skiing, in the Rocky Mountain National Parks. The physical encumbrances involved in winter data collection from vehicular visitors made the development of a "workable" methodology for the winter season a challenging exercise for the research supplier and the Steering Committee. The Methodology section of this document and the Technical Appendix detail the approach ultimately adopted by the study to capture information from winter visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks system.
METHODOLOGY
The following pages provide an overview of the Visitor Use and Profile Survey methodology. For a full description of the methodology, the reader is directed to the Technical Appendix (under separate cover) .
^ (iii)
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
Overview
The National Parks Utilization Study, Stage I; Visitor Use And Profile Survey was a cordon-type exit survey in which randomly selected representatives of travel parties leaving the four Rocky Mountain National Parks via highway, scheduled bus, scheduled train and overnight chartered motorcoach were interviewed. Interviewing was conducted throughout the four seasons, commencing on June 15, 1987 and ending on June 14, 1988 .
• Sampling And Weighting
A multi-stage stratified probability sample, stratified by mode of exit, exit port, weekday/weekend and season was designed by Ruston/Tomany & Associates and John Smart, President of Ap- plied Marketing Statistics. The sample of stints (time periods or events) used in the study was selected using a random selec- tion computer program. Adjustments to the final sampling plan for each season were made by Travel Alberta personnel and re- flected concerns about under-representation of subjectively important locations/times.
Survey completions were computer-weighted to reflect the inverse of the probabilities of selection on a stint, vehicle or party and individual level. These weights were used to expand the sample, on a season-by-season basis, to reflect all non- resident parks entrants, visitors and visitor expenditures dur- ing the survey period. Details of the sample design and weight- ing system are included in Section A, Chapters B and D of the Technical Appendix.
(iv)
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
• Data Collection
The survey design involved interviewing adults (16 years or more) as they left the national parks by road, scheduled bus/train or chartered motorcoach. Mechanics of the data collection phase of the study are detailed in Section B of the Technical Appendix.
In order to qualify to complete an interview, respondents had to live outside the parks, could not be in the park on a sales call or delivery, as a member of a work crew or employee, or commuting to or from work or school. Additionally, the selected respondent had to be leaving the parks system for the last time on the "entire trip". Adults from all origins were eligible for inclusion in the study.
• Roadside. Scheduled Bus. Scheduled Train Interviews
An interview was administered to qualified respondents by Ruston/Tomany & Associates* trained interviewers. The "on-site" questionnaires were prepared in a self -completion format for roadside traffic during the winter season due to the extremely cold weather conditions.
Qualified respondents were asked a series of questions designed to ascertain whether they further qualified as a "parks visitor" or were, by the following definitions^, considered to be a "pass-through" parks entrant:
For a full set of study definitions, see pages xi to xiii.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
(V)
Parks Visitor
An individual who had entered at least one of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks and had spent any time, and/or spent any money and/or done any sightseeing within the four parks' boundaries.
• Pass -through
An individual who had entered at least one of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks but did not spend any time, money, or do any sightseeing in any park.
In order to define a respondent as a visitor or a pass- through, questions were administered to ascertain which national parks had been entered, and which activities or ser- vices within the parks had been utilized ("Screening Question- naire" ) .
Parks visitors were asked to complete a questionnaire detailing characteristics of their trip (including the number of nights away from home, number spent in the national parks, type of accommodation used within the parks and number of nights spent in each, prepaid and direct expenditures for the travel party) .
Limited demographic information was obtained from both visitors and pass-throughs . Each respondent was given a self- completion questionnaire in the appropriate language to be filled out and mailed back after leaving the park. The "mail- back" questionnaire included questions about sites visited and activities participated in while the visitor was in Banff and/or Jasper National Park, ratings of these two parks on a
(vi)
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
i I
i f I I
I
variety of characteristics, and additional behavioural and demographic information about the household.
• Chartered Motorcoach Interviews
Chartered motorcoach information was collected via a self- completion questionnaire. These questionnaires were similar in content to the administered "on-site" questionnaire used for other modes. The modified "on-site" and standard "mailback" questionnaires were distributed to randomly selected passengers boarding a qualified motorcoach (an overnight charter coach departing the parks) . All boarding passengers were considered to be parks visitors.
• Non-English Interviews
French, German and Japanese translations of the survey materials were available in a self-completion format. If a selected individual was not comfortable completing the interview in English, the appropriate non-English materials were provided.
All questionnaires were pre-tested prior to their use in the field. Copies of the field materials used in the study are included under separate cover in Section B of the Technical Appendix-^ .
Copies of English versions of the roadside summer and winter questionnaires are appended to this document for reference purposes. See Section B, Volumes 1 and 2 of the Technical Appendix for complete set of questionnaires.
(vii)
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
f f I f I I
-1
• Special Winter Procedures
As mentioned previously, for most of the winter season (December 11, 1987/April 14, 1988), initial screening at the roadside was administered by an interviewer using an expanded Screening Questionnaire, but a sizeable portion of the "on-site" questionnaire was provided in a self-completion format. This approach was required because of the winter weather conditions in the parks.
In addition, special strata were designed to capture "dusk" skiers exiting the parks at the Banff East (Highway 1) and Jasper East gates. Without this procedure, the research would likely have systematically under-represented the exiting skier population because a sizeable portion of it is thought to exit the parks during time periods in which it is too dark to interview safely.
The procedure developed involved interviewing at randomly selected ski hill parking lots between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Only those skiers leaving the parks during pre-defined "dusk hours" and through specific exit points were deemed eligible for inclusion in the ski hill sample.
• Completed Interviews
A total of 3551 interviews were completed over the year. Ten "outlier" interviews were removed from the data file and imputed stints (for stints cancelled because of weather condi- tions) were added to the data file at the tabulation stage. The final distribution of usable interviews on which the tabu-
■ (ix) Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
Exhibit i
RECORD OF MONITORED STINTS AND VALIDATED COMPLETIONS
STINTS
Total Stints Conducted^
Total Stints Monitored:
By Ruston/Tomany Head Office Staff
By Ruston/Tomany On-Site Study Coordinator
394 97
28 69
100 25
18
COMPLETIONS
Total Completions'
Total Validations Attempted:
Successful
«
3228 361
%
100
11
307
10
Unsuccessful (Not Home, Busy, Moved Away, Refusals, Etc.)
54
(Source: Ruston/Tomany Survey Records)
All interviewing was monitored by on-site Ruston/Tomany trained supervisory personnel. Telephone validations of interviews were conducted within one month of the interview date.
^Including observation stints.
^Includes outlier interviews. Charter motorcoach interviews were excluded from the validation process because of the high propor- tion of non-English speaking respondents and the difficulty in re- contacting overseas visitors.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
lations are based, by season and mode, is shown in the following table:
Exhibit ii
|
BY SEASON^ |
TOTAL |
SUMMER |
FALL |
WINTER |
SPRING |
|
ENTRANTS |
3663 |
1504 |
523 |
1087 |
549 |
|
VISITORS |
2783 |
1189 |
378 |
822^ |
394 |
|
PASS -THROUGH |
880 |
315 |
145 |
265 |
155 |
|
BY MODE |
ROAD^ |
BUS |
TRAIN |
CHARTER |
|
|
ENTRANTS |
3002 |
131 |
197 |
333 |
|
|
VISITORS |
2132 |
126 |
192 |
333 |
|
|
PASS-THROUGHS |
870 |
5 |
5 |
N/A |
|
|
Source : |
Ruston/Tomany Survey Records |
The attitudinal questionnaire was distributed to 2783 visitors over the year and was returned in a usable form by 1503 (54% response rate) .
The facing table details stint monitoring and in-office validations conducted on completed interviews over the full course of the study. The table facing the following page details the contacts made in order to achieve the completed interviews .
^All figures include imputed stints. Seasons were defined by Travel Alberta as follows:
Summer June 15 to September 7
Fall September 8 to October 31
Winter November 1 to April 14
Spring April 15 to June 14
^390 Returned winter behavioural mailback.
•^Includes ski hill interviews.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
(X)
Exhibit iii
DISPOSITION OF CONTACTS
Total By Season. . .
Contacts Summer Fall Winter Spring
(Actual)
(6,876) %
(2,784) (959) (2,022) (1,111) % % % %
Refused Before Screening
Disqualified Vehicle Party-^
Not Final Exit From Parks System^
Qualified, But Refused After Screening
Total Completions With Qualified Parks Entrants
15
24
11
28
17
21
19
22
19
21
53
54
55
54
49
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 1-2)
■^Includes parks residents, staff, emergency vehicles, taxis, sales calls, deliveries, etc.
^To qualify, the respondent had to be leaving the parks for the last time
on the entire trip.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
• Coding. Editing. Data Tabulation
Ruston/Tomany & Associates* data processing department edited all questionnaires for internal consistency, and prepared code lists for review and approval by Travel Alberta personnel. Code lists were expanded on a seasonal basis to reflect issues and concerns that emerged as the complexion of parks visitation changed over time. The coding manual utilized in the data handling stage is provided in Section B, Volume 3 of the Tech- nical Appendix.
All data entry was verified. Prior to presentation of final estimates for each season, a review of existing infor- mation available to members of the Steering Committee about the number of visitors and their usage patterns within the Rocky Mountain National Park was undertaken. These reviews were conducted in conjunction with the Steering Committee, and any adjustments made to the original data file were approved by the Technical Committee. Expenditure information provided by parks visitors was allocated to categories and to Banff and Jasper National Parks according to pre-established rules. Details of the procedures used to review estimates and to assign expen- ditures are to be found in Section A, Chapters E and F of the Technical Appendix.
• Survey Definitions Parks Entrant
A parks entrant is any person who entered the national parks other than those who live or work in the parks, or are in the parks for the purposes of commuting to or from work or school, on a sales or service call, or pick-up or delivery.
■ (xi) Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
Parks Visitor
A parks visitor is an entrant who spent any time, money or did any sightseeing while within the four Rocky Mountain National Parks boundaries. Visitors to individual parks are defined to be those individuals who spent any time, money or did any sightseeing within the boundaries of the specific park^. Thus, the individual who entered Yoho National Park and Banff National Park, but spent time/ money or did sightseeing only in Banff National Park is defined as follows:
• Visitor to the Rocky Mountain National Parks;
• Visitor to Banff National Park;
• Pass-through to Yoho National Park.
Parks Pass-Through
An entrant who did not spend any time or money and did not do any sightseeing while within the four Rocky Mountain National Parks' boundaries is a pass-through for the entire parks system. The individual who entered but did not spend any time/money or do any sightseeing in a specific park is defined as a pass-through for that specific park.
Travel Party
For visitors exiting the parks by private vehicle, travel party is defined as those persons travelling with them in the vehicle. For those visitors exiting via bus, train or motorcoach, the travel party includes those people whom the respondent considers to be travelling with him or her in the same travel party. This, however, does not include
For overnight charters and all non-English respondents, "entrants" to a specific Park are also defined as "visitors" (see questionnaires for question wording) .
(xii)
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
all people travelling together on a bus or train. In some cases, travel parties consist of members from more than one household.
Person Visitor/Entrant
A person entrant is one person who entered the Rocky Mountain National Parks system. A person visitor is one person who visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks system. If four people are travelling together, the particulars of this trip are applied to each member of the travel party. This results in a total of four person entrants or visitors, depending on the characteristics of the trip.
Party Visit/Entrant
An entrance to the Rocky Mountain National Parks by all members of the party constitutes one party entrant. Re- gardless of the number of people in the party, it is considered one party entrance or party visit, depending on the characteristics of the trip.
Person Night
A person night is one night on a trip spent by one person. If two people spend three nights each, this constitutes six person nights.
Party Night
This is one night spent on the trip by the party. If two people from a party spend three nights, this constitutes three party nights.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
(xiii)
FINDINGS
Findings of the Visitor Use and Profile Survey are avail- able in the following documents:
• Reports
Volume I — Executive Summary
Volume II — General Summary
Volume, Value And Trip Characteristics
Volume III — General Summary
Activities, Sites And Attitudinal Information
• Detailed Tabulations
Volume I — Administered Questionnaire Data (Sections A, B, C, D)
Volume II — Self-Completion Questionnaire Data (Sections A, B, C)
• Technical Appendix
Section A: Methodology
Section B: Data Collection, Survey Manual and Coding Materials (Volumes 1, 2, 3)
Section C: Detailed Stint Information
• Data Tape
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
(xiv)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd. wishes to acknowledge its gratitude to the many organizations and individuals who contributed technical expertise, background data, invaluable experience and moral support to the project team over the course of the National Parks Utilization Study, Stage I; Visitor Use and Profile Survey. It would be impossible to list everyone who contributed to this study, but special thanks are due to:
• Don Wilson, Manager, Market Research and Analysis, Travel Alberta, who kept the study moving over many months ;
• Jim Rouse, Canadian Parks Service, who raised key methodological and estimation concerns;
• Mike Sheridan, Project Manager, Statistics Canada's Special Surveys Group, for his down-to-earth method- ological insights;
• Don Sears, Chief of Visitor Services, Banff National Park, whose day-to-day involvement in and support of the study ensured cooperation for our survey teams throughout the parks;
• Bob Huddleston, Senior Health and Safety Officer, Alberta Transportation, whose invaluable contribution to the roadside vehicle diversion procedures helped make it possible to interview motorists safely; and
• Gerry Spratt, Occupational Health and Safety Coordinator, Alberta Personnel Administration, whose insight and experience helped us carry out twelve months of 100% "accident free" roadside interviewing.
(XV)
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
Among the other organizations and individuals who deserve special thanks:
• For Travel Alberta: Don Syrnyk, Alan Koehler,
Bev Darbyshire, Sid Nieuwenhuis, Lorena Tyschuk and Brenda Bush La France and Enid Markus (formerly with Travel Alberta) ;
• For the British Columbia Ministry of Tourism and Provincial Secretary: Jim Lee and Sylvia Waterer;
• For the Canadian Parks Service: Steve Kun, Dave Day, George Balding, Ian Church, Fred Bander, Doug Chambers, Jillian Roulet, Grant Potter, Judy Otton, Scott Meis, Peter Whyte, Byron Irons and the entire National Parks Warden Service;
• For the Banff -Lake Louise Chamber of Commerce:
Hap Freeman;
• For the Jasper Chamber of Commerce: Cindy Beland;
• For Alberta Transportation: Shirley Johnson and Dave Sturgeon ;
• For Tourism Canada: Blair Stevens and Gordon Taylor;
• For the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion: Georgine Ulmer;
• For the Royal Canadian Mounted Police: the men and women of the Canmore, Banff, Jasper, Nordegg, Field, B.C., Radium Hot Springs, B.C., and Golden, B.C. Detachments ;
g (xvi)
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
• For Via Rail: Dorothy Peterson and Eddie Ram;
• For Brewster Transportation: David Morrison, Mel Billings and Jim Fraser;
• For Greyhound Canada: Bob Park; and
• The managers and staff of the eighty-one accommodation establishments and four ski resorts in the parks, without whose cooperation the study could not have been completed.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
(xvii)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. OVERVIEW OF VOUJME AND VAJJCJE ESTIMATES FOR THE FOUR ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
1. Introduction 1
2. Annual Volume Estimates For The Rocky Mountain National Parks 4
3. Annual Visitation To Individual Parks 5
4. Conversion Of Entrants To Visitors For Individual
Parks ^ 7
5. Seasonal Visitation To Individual Parks 8
6. Place Of Residence Of Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks 10
7. Same-Day And Overnight Visitation Patterns In The
Rocky Mountain National Parks 11
8. Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks 12
9. Accommodation Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks 13
10. Annual Expenditure Estimates For The Four Rocky Mountain National Parks 14
11. A Summary Of Key Volume/Value Estimates: Expenditures, Visitors And Nights By Season 16
12. A Comparison Of Numbers Of Visitors And Expenditures By Same-Day/Overnight Visitors And Place Of
Residence 17
13. Annual Expenditures For The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Expense Category 18
B. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF VISITORS TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
14. Introduction And Overview 19
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
L [ [ L C C
c
c
L.
15. a) Profile Of Visitor Parties By Parks Visited 23
b) Profile Of Visitor Parties By Season 27
16. a) Party Size And Composition By Parks Visited 29
b) Party Size And Coiriposition By Season 30
17. a) Place Of Residence By Parks Visited 31
b) Place Of Residence By Season 34
C. VISIT CHARACTERISTICS OF VISITORS TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
18. a) Mode Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks
By Parks Visited 36
b) Mode Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks
By Season 39
19. The Rocky Mountain National Parks As The Main Destination Of Entire Trip 41
20. Entrants And Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Parks And Season 4 3
21. Multiple Park Utilization In The Rocky Mountain National Parks 45
22. a) Length Of Visit To The Rocky Mountain National Parks
By Parks Visited 47
b) Length Of Visit To The Rocky Mountain National Parks
By Season 50
D. ACCOMMODATION IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
23. The "Typical Guest" And The "Typical Camper" 52
24. a) Accommodation Utilization By Person Nights Spent In
Specific Parks 55
b) Accommodation Utilization By Person Nights Spent By
Season 57
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid. ■
L L L [ C [ C [
c
25. Commercial Roofed Accommodation And Camping Nights
In Specific Parks By Season 59
E. EXPENDITURES IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARRS
26. Prepaid And Direct Expenditures 61
27. Incidence And Proportion Of Expenditure By Category
For The Rocky Mountain National Parks 63
28. a) Proportion Of Expenditures In Specific Categories
By Park 66
b) Proportion Of Expenditures In Specific Categories
By Season 67
29. Average Expenditures, By Category, For The Rocky Mountain National Parks — An Overview 68
30. Average Expenditures Per Night And Per Same-Day Visit, By Category, For The Rocky Mountain National Parks 72
31. a) Total Average Expenditure By Park 75
b) Total Average Expenditure By Season 76
c) Total Average Expenditure By Place Of Residence 77
3 2. a) Average Expenditures For Lodging And Restaurants
By Park 78
b) Average Expenditures For Retail And Recreational
Expenses, By Park 80
3 3. a) Average Expenditures For Lodging And Restaurants
By Season 81
b) Average Expenditures For Retail And Recreational
Expenses By Season 82
F. OTHER TOPICS RELATED TO THE VISITOR EXPERIENCE IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
34. a) Main Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip By Parks
Visited 83
b) Main Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip By Season 85
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
■I 'I
r: r:
3 5. a) Volunteered Features That Attract Visitors To Banff
Or Jasper National Park By Parks Visited 86
b) Volunteered Features That Attract Visitors To Banff
Or Jasper National Park By Season 87
36. a) Overall Rating Of Visit To The Banff/Jasper National
Parks By Parks Visited 88
b) Overall Rating Of Visit To The Banff/Jasper National
Parks By Season 90
37. a) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And
Jasper National Parks By Parks Visited 91
b) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And
Jasper National Parks By Season 93
c) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And
Jasper National Parks — In Detail 94
38. a) Usage Of Specific Park Services By Parks Visited 95
b) Usage Of Specific Park Services By Season 97
39. a) Stated Impact Of The 1988 Winter Olympics By Parks
Visited 98
b) Stated Impact Of The 1988 Winter Olympics By
Season 99
APPENDICES
• Additional Summary Tables
• Stage In Life Cycle Definitions
• Questionnaires
Rusion/Tomany & Associates lid.
■■■I •-•HI
r:
A. OVERVIEW OF VOUJME AND VALUE ESTIMATES FOR THE POUR ROCKY
HOUNTAJN y^TIPy^AI^ PA^
1. Intrcx3uction
The analysis of findings from the national Parks Utilization Study, Stage I; Visitor Use and Profile Survey is divided into three separate volumes. Volumes I (Executive SuTTimary) and II of this report primarily cover topics included in the questionnaire administered to randomly selected indi- viduals as they were exiting the four Rocky Mountain National Parks. As such, the estimates included in these volumes derive froTn the full sample of entrants included in the study.
Volume III reports the findings obtained from the self- completion attitudinal questionnaire given to visitors as they were exiting the parks. These data have been weighted and projected to the full population of visitors, but are based on the behaviour and attitudes of approximately one-half of the interviewed visitor population (not all visitors chose to complete and return the self-completion questionnaire) . The findings presented in Volume III derive, therefore, from a smaller base and have less stability than do the figures presented in Volumes I and II.
While the general division of data described above prevails throughout most of this report, there are instances in which data from the both sources (administered questionnaire and self -completion (juestionnaire) are brought together for compara- tive purposes. In these instances, a footnote is provided to alert the reader. Unless such a footnote is provided, the read- er should assume that findings in Volumes I and II represent the
■ -1«
Ruston/Tomany ft Associates Ud.
Exhibit 1
STATISTICS CANADA CLASSES OF STATISTICS^
Coefficient Of Variation
A 0.0 • 0.59%
B 0.6 - 1.0%
C 1.1 - 2.5%
D 2.6 - 5.0%
E 5.1 - 10.0%
F 10.1 - 16.5%
16.6 - 25.0% Qualified Nur.ber
Use With Extrene Caution
H 25.1% - Or More Unpublishable by
Statistics Canada 's Standards
lAt the 95% level of confidence. See Technical Appendix for a discussion of the calculation of the Coefficient of Variation.
iston/Toxnony & Associates lid.
full sample, and that Volume III findings represent that portion of the sample that returned the self-completion questionnaire .
For details of the weighting and projection procedures adopted for handling the two types of data, the reader is re- ferred to Section A of the Technical Appendix (under separate cover) .
Estimates provided in this report are reliable within a stated range, 19 times out of 20. The tolerances are provided for key statistics in Chapter A of this report (on summary tables in the form of the Coefficient of Variation^ as cate- gorized by Statistics Canada and within the text in the form of the numerical range on each key estimate at the 95% level of confidence^) . The facing table provides the Statistics Canada Classes of Statistics, at the 95% level of confidence and should be used in interpreting the survey findings.
Since the remainder of the report presents findings based on the total estimates, the reader is encouraged to refer to Chapter A when evaluating percentage distributions or differen- ces among sub-groups. All figures used to calculate the total standard error of a statistic (replicates of the data base) , and the coefficient of variation are appended to Detailed Tabula- tions. Volume I. Section D (under separate cover) .
All statistics presented in this report reflect estimates based on the one year data collection period (June 15, 1987 to June 14, 1988). While there is no obvious reason to suppose
^The letter in parenthesis next to key statistics. ^The ± figure in parenthesis following the statistic.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
I-
M
P P U CI
Ci
[1
[■ r:
r:
L..
I
that this time period is atypical, generalizations to past or future years should be undertaken with caution, particularly in light of the benchmark nature of these volume statistics and the sensitivity of the tourism market to demographic and economic impacts .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-3-
Exhibit 2
Actual
Annual^ Volume Estimates For The Rocky Mountain National Parks
party
(3,231)
Person (3,231)
Entrants
2,241,000 (A)3
5,513,100 (A)
Visitors
1,625,500 (A)
4,084,000 (B)
Pass-Throughs
615,500 (A)
1,429,100 (B)
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 7-1, 3, 5, 7)
^"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988. See Foreword for definitions of entrants, visitors and pass-throughs
^All figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred .
^Letters in parentheses constitute Statistics Canada's Class of Statistic, based on the Coefficient of Variation at the 95% confidence level. For more information, see "Statistics Canada Classes of Statistics", in this volume.
I
uston/Tonruxny & Associates lid.
2. Annual Volume Estimates For The Rocky Mountain National Parks
More than 5.5 million individuals (± 57,000) from Canada, the United States and overseas entered the boundaries of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988 (all references to time periods in this report refer spe- cifically to this one year period) . These men, women and children constitute more than two million separate travel parties (+ 11,000)^.
Despite the fact that the Rocky Mountain National Parks are major vehicular conduits for traffic moving eastward from British Columbia and westward from Alberta, the vast majority of qualified entrants to these Parks claim to have spent time, money or to have done sightseeing^ while within the boundaries of the parks system. According to the survey definition, ap- proximately four million (±85,000) individuals or more than 1.6 million (+13,000) travel parties visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988.
Individuals entering the four park boundaries solely for the purpose of passing through account for approximately one quarter of all Rocky Mountain National Parks* entrants (1.4 million ± 28 , 000) .
^Measurement of park entrants is based on qualified travel parties (see Foreword for exclusions from survey definitions) leaving one of the following parks for the last time on their trip away from home: Banff National Park, Jasper National Park, Yoho National Park, and Kootenay National Park.
^Respondents defined themselves as "visitors" if they responded in the affirmative to the following question: "While in (READ EACH PARK ENTERED) . did you stop and spend any time or money or do any sightseeing?"
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-4-
chibit 3
Actual
Annual Person Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks^
In Total (2,351)
Four Parks'
4,084,000 (B)
Alberta Parks
Banff National Park Jasper National Park
3,898,600 (C) 3,167,500 (D) 1,598,900 (F)
British Columbia Parks Yoho National Park Kootenay National Park
748,300 (G)* 425,600 (G)* 424,700 (G)*
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 12-1)
-*-"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988. Person visitors: Spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
^All figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred.
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution.
I
uston/Tomany & Associates lid.
3.
Annual Visitation To Individual ParXs
Visitors^ to each of the four parks that comprise the Rocky Mountain National Parks constitute one of the prime analysis units of this study. As such, it is important that their survey definition be clearly stated:
• An Alberta National Parks Visitor
Any individual (including children) who claimed to spend time, money or go sightseeing within the boundaries of Banff or Jasper National Parks.
• A Banff National Park Visitor
Any individual (including children) who claimed to spend time, money or go sightseeing within the boundaries of Banff National Park.
• A Jasper National Park Visitor
Any individual (including children) who claimed to spend time, money or go sightseeing within the boundaries of Jasper National Park.
• A British Columbia National Parks Visitor
Any individual (including children) who claimed to spend time, money or go sightseeing within the boundaries of Yoho or Kootenay National Parks.
Visitors to Yoho National Park and Kootenay National Park are defined in a manner analogous to Banff National Park visitors.
Almost four million individuals visited the Alberta national parks over the year (3.9 million ± 127,000), and over three million spent time, money or went sightseeing within the
^Throughout this report, the term "visitor" is used to denote a "person visitor" measure. The term "visit" is used to denote a "party visit" measure.
Ruslon/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-5-
B
i C L C
[:
V
[
[.
V
4
boundaries of Banff National Park (3.2 million ± 261,000). Jasper National Park attracts about one-half the visitors that its neighbour to the south does (1.6 million ± 343,000) whereas the visitation to Yoho and Kootenay National Parks is almost evenly divided between these two British Columbia parks (ap- proximately 400,000 each). Please note that visitor estimates to the British Columbia parks should be viewed with caution^.
^The study was designed to provide reliable volume estimates for the four park system, and for Banff National Park and Jasper National Park separately. It was not designed to provide reliable estimates for the British Columbia parks separately.
Ruston /Tomoziy & Assockrtes Ltd.
-6-
Exhibit 4
Annual Person Entrants And Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks^
Conversion
Person Person Of Entrants
Entrants Visitors To Visitors
Actual (3,231) (2,351)
Four Parks
5,513,100
(A)
4,084,000
(B)
74%
Alberta Parks
Banff
Jasper
British Columbia Parks
Yoho
Kootenay
5,443,300 (C)
4,635,100 (C)
1,981,700 (D)
2,490,900 (B)
1,655,200 (B)
1,130,900 (E)
3,898,600 (D)
3,167,500 (D)
1,598,900 (F)
748,300 *(G)
425,600 *(G)
424,700 *(G)
72% 68% 81%
30% 26% 38%
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 26-6/10)
^"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988. "Person entrants" entered specific park, and "visitors" spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park.
^All figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred.
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution.
uston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
4.
Conversion Of Entrants To Visitors For Individual Parks
Approximately three in every four entrants to the Rocky Mountain National Parks constitute visitors to this park system. Of the four individual parks that comprise the system, Jasper National Park is most successful in "converting" entrants to visitors — eight in ten possible visitors claim that they spend time, money or sightsee within the borders of Jasper National Park.
Of all possible visitors (i.e., entrants) to Banff National Park, two-thirds constitute bona fide visitors according to the survey's definition.
International reputation and visitor infrastructure are more limited in the British Columbia national parks than they are in the Alberta national parks. These differences may account for the lower ratio of visitors to entrants in Yoho and Kootenay National Parks than is evident for the Alberta parks. Of the two British Columbia parks, Kootenay (38%) is somewhat more successful than is Yoho (26%) in generating visitors from those individuals who enter the respective boundaries.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-7-
xhibit 5
-tual
Person Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks In. . .Season^
(1,189)
(378)
yjnter (390)
Spring (394)
Dur Parks^
1,646,100
(E)
391,800 (F)
1,441,500
(C)
604,600 *(G)
Alberta Parks 1,551,800
(E)
Banff Jasper
1,203,100 (A)
907,100 *(G)
British Columbia Parks 487,200
(A)
355,100 (E)
310,000 (F)
142,100 (F)
86,300 **(H)
1,403,100 (D)
1,166,000 (E)
337,000 (E)
67,200 **(H)
588,500 *(G)
488,500
212,900 (C)
107,600 *(G)
Yoho
289,600 (B)
40,300 **(H)
38,500 **(K)
57,200 **(H)
Kootenay
276,700 *(G)
57,200 **(H)
29,600 **(H)
61,200 **(H)
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 82-3, 84-8)
■*-Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park. See
Foreword for definition of seasons. 2A11 figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest
hundred.
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution.
*"Unpublishable number" by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use.
Ruston/Tomoxiy & Associates lid.
5. Seasonal Visitation To Individual Parks
The summer season^ generates the highest level of utilization of the Rocky Mountain National Parks — over 1.6 million (± 192,000) men, women and children visited the parks system during the twelve week 1987 summer season. Winter, too, is a key season for these parks. The winter season is, of course, considerably longer than is summer in the Rocky Mountain National Parks. Over this twenty-four week period, more than 1.4 million (± 48,000) individuals spent time, money or went sightseeing within the parks system.
The "shoulder" seasons account for approximately one- third of the year, and approximately one-quarter of parks visitors. To put this in some perspective, the summer season constitutes about one-quarter of the year, but attracts about 40% of visitors.
The distribution of visitors across specific parks by season suggests the following:
• The Alberta National Parks enjoy dual season usage to a much greater extent than do the British Columbia National Parks. The three million visitors to the two Alberta National Parks in the two "peak" seasons are almost evenly divided between summer (1.6 million ± 170,000) and winter (1.4 million ± 119,000).
^Travel Alberta defined the Rocky Mountain National Parks seasons as follows: Summer — June 15 to September 7; Fall — September 8 to October 31; Winter ~ November 1 to April 14; and Spring — April 15 to June 14.
-8
Ruston/Tomany ft Associates lid.
l: l: c
t: t
V [■■
• The British Columbia National Parks, on the other hand, would appear to have only one "peak" season. Almost two-thirds of these parks' total visitation occurs in the course of the twelve week summer
(0.5 million ± 985). Estimates for other seasons in the British Columbia parks are too volatile to support analysis.
• Of the two Alberta parks, Banff is considerably more successful in achieving balanced utilization in the two peak seasons. In this park, summer (1.2 million + 10,000) and winter (1.2 million ± 132,000) visitation levels are almost identical. While the estimates must be viewed with caution, Jasper National Park would appear to be more heavily utilized in the summer season (0.9 million + 346,000) than it is in the winter (0.3 million ± 37,000).
Rusion/Tomany Sr Associates lid.
-9-
Khibit 6
Place Of Residence Of Rocky Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ Who Visited...
Any Park
-tual (2,351) sighted/Projected,
In Thousands (4,084.0)
%
ny Canada 80
British Columbia 10 Alberta 59 Other Provinces 12
ny U.S.A. 14
ny Overseas 6
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-1/2)
Spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
6. Place Of Residence Of Visitors To The Roc)cy Mountain National Parks .
The vast majority of visitors to the parks are Canadians. As many as 8-in-lO, or 3.3 million (± 92,000) parks' visitors reside in Canada. Alberta is the single biggest contributor of such visitors — 2.4 million (± 98,000). Approximately 0.4 million (+ 166,000) British Columbians visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988.
About 0.6 million (± 35,000) residents of the United States and roughly 0.2 million (+ 121,000) individuals from other countries visited the parks system over the year. A more detailed analysis of the origin of visitors to the individual parks, by season, is provided in Chapter B of this volume.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-10-
chibit 7
Same-Day And Overnight Visitation Patterns In The Rocky Mountain National Par)cs
:tual
Same-Day Visitors
(770)
Overnight Visitors
(1,581)
)ur Parks ^
1,796,000 (F) 2,288,000 (F)
Alberta Parks
1,679,200 (F)
2,219,400 (E)
Banff National Park Jasper National Park
1,325,900 (G)* 1,841,700 (E) 487,000 (D) 1,111,900 (G) *
British Columbia Parks
239,000 (G)*
509,300 (H)**
Yoho National Park Kootenay National Park
119,100 (D) 133,800 (H)**
306,500 (H)** 290,900 (H)**
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 37-1, 5)
All figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred "Qualified number": Use with extreme caution.
"Unpublishable number" by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use.
uston/Tomany & Associates lid.
7. Same-Day And Overnight Visitation Patterns In The Rocky Mountain National Parks
More than 4-in-lO, or 1.8 million (± 519,000) Rocky Mountain National Parks visitors restrict their visit to the parks to a single day while the remaining 6-in-lO, or 2.3 million (± 604,000) spend at least one night within the parks' boundaries .
Banff is considerably more likely to attract "day visitors" than is any other park. Slightly over 4-in-lO (42%) Banff visitors do not stay overnight in that park, while only about 3-in-lO (31%) Jasper visitors are "day visitors". The two British Columbia parks are similar to Jasper in terms of their ratios of same-day to overnight visitors.
Ruslon/Tomany & Associates lid.
-11-
Exhibit 8
Annual^ Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks
IP TPtal
Actual (4,721)
Four Parks2 6,063,100 (E)
Alberta Parks 5,523,200 (E)
Banff National Park 3,683,300 (E)
Jasper National Park 1,839,900 (F)
British Coluinbia Parks 291,300 (H)**
Yoho National Park 136,400 (H)**
Kootenay National Park 155,000 (H)**
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-1, 44-11, 44-17, 44-25, 44-33, 44-38, 44-42)
^"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988.
2A11 figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred. If nights were spent in the parks but the specific location/park was not identified, these nights are included in the four parks total but not in any individual park figure. As a result, the sum of the four individual parks figures is less than the four parks figure.
**"Unpublishable number" by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use.
histon/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
8.
Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks
In the course of the year, more than six million (± 969,000) person nights were spent within the boundaries of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks. The vast majority of these nights were spent in Alberta parks (5.5 million ± 807,000), reflecting the higher level of visitation achieved by Banff and Jasper relative to the two British Columbia parks.
Just as Banff National Park attracts almost two visitors for each visitor to Jasper National Park over a full year period (See Section A. 3), so too does it host about twice as many person nights (3.7 million ± 440,000) as does Jasper (1.8 million ± 368,000).
More than 9-in-lO visitors to the entire Rocky Mountain National Parks system state that they visited the Alberta national parks. A similar proportion of all person nights spent within the system were spent in Banff or Jasper National Parks.
While person night estimates for the British Columbia parks do not warrant detailed comment, they do suggest that the relationship between visitors and nights is quite different from that evident in the Alberta parks. Approximately l-in-5 visi- tors to the four park system claim to have spent time, money or to have gone sightseeing in Yoho or Kootenay National Parks, but according to the survey estimate (albeit a highly variable one), fewer than l-in-20 total parks person nights (0.3 million + 24 8,000) were spent in these two parks.
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
Exhibit 9
Actual
Annual^ Person Night Accommo- dation In Roc)cy Mountain National Parks
(4,721)
Total Person Nights^
6,063,100 (E)
Person Nights In... Roofed Accommodation Hotel/Motel/Lodge Commercial Cottage/Cabin Other Roofed
4,246,500 (C)
3,952,200 (C)
153,700 (H)**
140,600 (H)**
Camping
1,388,400 (B)
Family/Own Vacation Home
277,400 (G)*
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-1/2)
^••Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988. 2a11 figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred.
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution. **"Unpublishable number" by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
9. Accommodation Nights Spent In the Rocky Mountain National Pt>rks —
On an annual basis, over 4.2 million (± 114,000) person nights, or 7-in-lO of all person nights, are spent in commercial roofed accommodation within the boundaries of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks. As is clearly evident from the facing table, hotel, motel, resort and lodge facilities predominate within the commercial roofed accommodation sector (4.0 million 1 143,000 nights) .
In addition, about 1.4 million (± 19,000) person nights are spent in camping facilities within the four park system. This represents approximately l-in-4 of the person nights spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks over the year.
Not surprisingly, camping spaces are primarily filled during the summer season only. In fact, about 8-in-lO of all ••camper nights" but fewer than 4-in-lO of the 4.2 million commercial roofed accommodation nights occur during the summer season.
Ihiston/Tomany Associates Ltd.
-13-
Exhibit 10
Annual^ Expenditure Within The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Park^
Actual
($842,538)
Four Parks^
$417,227,400 (E)
Alberta Parks
$399,441,500 (F)
Banff National Park
$286,522,300 (E)
Jasper National Park
$112,919,200 (G)*
British Columbia Parks
$ 13,400,000 (F)
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 47-1, 48-1, 49-1, 50-1, 51-1)
^••Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988.
^Includes all prepaid and direct expenditures Bade vithin the Rocky Mountain National Parks boundaries, and allocated to specific parks according to established rules (See Technical Appendix. Section A) .
^All figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred. Sum of individual parks* expenditures is less than four parks total due to rounding in the calculations.
♦ •'Qualified number": Use with extreme caution.
Ruston/Tomany & Associales Ud. B
10. Annual Expenditure Estimates For The Four Rocky Mountain National Parks
More than $400 million (± $73 million) were spent by visitors within the Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988. This estimate includes all expenses in- curred within the parks (including those that were prepaid prior to entry into the parks system) , but excludes all expenses incurred in travel to the Rocky Mountain National Parks (e.g., transportation to the parks system, accommodation outside the boundaries, etc.)^. On average, each man, woman and child who visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks during the survey year spent approximately $100 in the parks system (See Section 29 for average expenditures) .
Almost seven of every ten dollars spent within the Rocky Mountain National Parks, or $287 million (+ $37 million) , were spent in Banff National Park. Likely because it hosts about one-half the number of visitors as does Banff, revenues for Jasper National Park are estimated, with caution, to be less than one-half the revenue that accrues to Banff National Park.
expenditure estimates provided in this report are in Canadian dollars. Conversion of foreign currencies into Canadian dollars was conducted throughout the year-long survey. Exchange rates were monitored on a weekly basis, and the average rate for a calendar month for each foreign currency was applied to interviews conducted during that month.
^All expenditure information was collected on a category by category basis for the travel party. Prepaid expenses, both as packages and individual items, were collected separately. See the questionnaire appended to this volume for the exact question wording. The Technical Appendix. Section A (under separate cover) contains a complete discussion of the development of expenditure estimates and the rules utilized for allocating expenses to particular parks within the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-14-
[- c:
L.
c:
c [ c [ c
The more northern park receives about $113 million
(± $55 million) in visitor expenditures over the year.
The British Columbia parks generate about $13 million (± $3 million) in revenue over the year, or l-in-33 of all dollars spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
|
xhibit 11 |
■ |
||
|
Seasonal^ |
Sxunmary For The Four Rocky Mountain |
||
|
National Parks |
|||
|
Person |
|||
|
Visitors |
^iqhts |
Expenditures^ |
|
|
actual |
(2,351) |
(4,721) |
($842,538) |
|
$ |
|||
|
4,084,000 |
6,063,100 |
$417,227,400 |
|
|
(B) |
(E) |
(E) |
|
|
Summer |
1, 646, 100 |
2,835,200 |
9J.01, Do / , ^uu |
|
(E) |
(F) |
(E) |
|
|
Fall |
391,800 |
521,700 |
$ 41,334,700 |
|
(F) |
(E) |
(D) |
|
|
Winter |
1,441,500 |
2,055,300 |
$151,192,400 |
|
(C) |
(D) |
** (H) |
|
|
Spring |
604,600 |
651,000 |
$ 63,133,100 |
|
*(G) |
(F) |
(D) |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-5, 45-5, 47-5) ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
2Spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks. 3Includes all prepaid and direct expenditures made within the Rocky
Mountain National Parks' boundaries. 4A11 figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest hundred
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution. **"Unpublishable number by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
11. A Summary Of Key Volume/Value Estimates: Expenditures, Visitors And Nights By Season
When examined on a seasonal basis, expenditures made within the Rocky Mountain National Parks system closely parallel volume levels for the four seasons. Specifically, about 4-in-lO of all dollars spent within the parks, or $162 million (± $2 3 million) , are spent during the summer season. Corres- pondingly, this season hosts 4-in-lO of the year's visitors. Although winter expenditure figures are presented with hesi- tation because of their extreme volatility, the data seem to suggest that this season accounts for more than one-third of all park visitors (35%) and the same proportion of annual expen- ditures (36%, or $151 million ± $104 million). Virtually iden- tical patterns are evident for each of the shoulder seasons as well .
The absence of roofed accommodation costs for the substantial number of summer visitors who camp in the Rocky Mountain National Parks is likely reflected in the fact that this season accounts for almost 5-in-lO person nights (47%) , but for less than 4-in-lO dollars expended over the year (39%) . By way of contrast, the proportions of annual expenditures and person nights accounted for by the winter season — when camping is especially rare — are virtually the same.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-16-
|
xhibit 12 |
■ |
|
|
A Comparison Of Numbers Of Visitors And |
||
|
Expenditures By Saune-Day/Ovemight Visitors |
||
|
Person Visitors-*- |
Expenditures^ |
|
|
.ctual |
f JD± ) |
|
|
feighted/Projected |
||
|
In Thousands |
(4,084.0) |
($417,227.4) |
|
% |
% |
|
|
?ype Of Visitor |
||
|
Same-Day |
44 |
8 |
|
Overnight |
56 |
92 |
|
?lace Of Residence |
||
|
Canada |
80 |
59 |
|
British Columbia |
10 |
5 |
|
Alberta |
59 |
41 |
|
Other Provinces |
12 |
13 |
|
Any U.S.A. |
14 |
27 |
|
Any Overseas |
6 |
14 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-1/2; 37-1/2 and 47-3, 5)
^Spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
^Includes all prepaid and direct expenditures made within the Rocky Mountain National Parks' boundaries.
Ruston/Tomany & Associcrtes lid.
12. A Comparison Of Numbers Of Visitors And Expenditures By Same-Dav/Ovemiaht Visitors And Place Of Residence
The facing table presents a comparison of volume estimates (number of visitors) and value estimates (expendi- tures) by type of visitor (same-day or overnight) and place of residence of visitors.
The most interesting, if not surprising, finding from this comparison is that while same-day visitors account for more than 4-in-lO parks visitors, they only contribute about l-in-12 of the dollars spent by visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks. Overnight visitors, on the other hand, account for more than ninety percent of expenditures.
It is also interesting to note that although Canadian residents account for 8-in-lO parks visitors, they contribute a somewhat lower proportion of parks expenditures (59%) . This relationship is, in the main, reversed within the foreign market:
• U.S.A. visitors contribute about l-in-4 of total expen- ditures in the parks, but represent approximately l-in-7 visitors ;
• Overseas visitors spend l-in-7 of all dollars spent in the parks, but represent only l-in-17 visitors.
Ruston/TomooiY & Associates Ud.
-17-
hibit 13
Actual
Annual Expenditure Within The Roclcy Mountain National Parks, By Category^
($842,538) $
Total Annual Expenditure^
$417,227,400 (E)
Lodging (Excluding Camping Fees)
Restaurants
Retail
Recreation/Pleasure
Vehicle Maintenance (Gas, Oil, Repairs) Within Parks
Groceries/Beverage
Park Entrance/Licence Fees
Camping Fees
Conference/Registration Fees
Transportation/Auto Rental Within Parks
$126,883,900 (A)
$123,122,600 (F)
$ 59,655,100 (H)**
$ 42,558,200 (H)**
$ 27,335,100 (G)*
$ 18,015,900 (G)*
$ 6,984,000 (G)*
$ 4,855,500 (D)
$ 4,385,700 (H)**
$ 3,431,400 (C)
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 47-1, 2)
^"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987/June 14, 1988. Includes all prepaid and direct expenditures made within the Rocky
Mountain National Parks* boundaries. 2a11 figures are weighted/projected and rounded to the nearest
hundred.
♦"Qualified number": Use with extreme caution. **"Unpublishable number" by Statistics Canada's standards: Do not use.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
13. Annual Expenditures For The Roc}cy Mountain National Parks Bv Expense Category
Not surprisingly, "food and lodging" constitute the two largest contributors to tourism revenue for the Rocky Mountain National Parks. Accominodation within the four park system (excluding camping fees) generates expenditures of more than $127 million (± $1.5 million) while food and beverages purchased in restaurants within the parks generate only slightly less revenue ($123 million ± $33 million) .
Other important contributors to the total revenue gene- rated by visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks, many of which should be viewed with caution (see Class of Statistic on facing table) include retail purchases ($60 million ± $34 million) , recreation-related expenditures such as tickets to events and equipment rentals ($43 million ± $33 million) , vehicle gas, oil and maintenance at service stations within the parks ($27 million + $9 million) , and groceries and beverages purchased at stores within the parks ($18 million + $8 million) .
Between June 1987 and June 1988, park visitors con- tributed almost $12 million directly to the Canadian Parks Service in the form of entrance and licence fees ($7 million ± $2 million) and camping fees ($5 million ± $0.3 million). Because so few visitors expended money on conference and registration fees and transportation within the parks, including shuttle buses, taxis and rental cars picked up in the parks, estimates of revenue for these expenses are quite volatile. The data do suggest, however, that these combined categories constitute about two percent of the Rocky Mountain National Parks' annual revenue.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-18-
L L L L [ C
c c
c
[ [
C
B. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF VISITORS TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
14 . Introduction And Overview
As will be demonstrated in subsequent sections of this
chapter, the demographic profile of visitors to the four Rocky
Mountain National Parks differs according to season, mode of
entry and the specific parks included on the park itinerary.
Prior to examining these differences, it may be helpful to
obtain an overview of the "typical" visitor, recognizing that
there are exceptions and variations to every generalization.
The "Typical Visitor"^
• The typical Rocky Mountain National Parks visitor is a Canadian, and most likely an Albertan who earns a comfortable living^ from his professional or other white collar job.
• He drives to the park system, accompanied by at least one other adult.
• He is unlikely to have any young people along with him on the trip, either because he is in the pre-children
lAll information in this section is derived from party measures. For proportions or numbers of person visitors who meet each characteristic referred to in this section, see the summary tables in this section or the detailed tabulations.
The masculine gender is used throughout this discussion because a majority of the spokespersons for visitor parties are male.
^All income, household composition and stage in life cycle information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tabulations, Volume II) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-19-
stage in the life cycle (young singles and couples) or because his children are grown (older singles and couples) ^ .
• On his trip through the parks system, the "typical visitor" is more likely to meet American visitors than he is to meet fellow Canadians from any one province other than Alberta.
• When he encounters visitors from overseas, they will be from a host of countries, but he will most likely mingle with those who have travelled from Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia and West Germany.
• If he is interested in meeting American and Japanese visitors to the parks, he will maximize his chances of doing so in the lobbies of hotels and resort facili- ties that host overnight charter tours.
• The opportunity to meet Japanese tourists is about the same regardless of which season the "typical visitor" enters the Rocky Mountain National Parks, but Americans would be considerably more difficult to find in the winter than in the summer. On the other hand, if he is interested in encountering fellow Albertans, the "typical visitor" would be wise to schedule his trip in the winter.
^All income, household composition and stage in life cycle information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tabulations, Volume II).
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-20-
L L L L L L I I [ [ [ [ [ [
Some Idiosyncracies of the "Typical American Visitor"
• The American tourist is older than is the "typical parks visitor". He is, therefore, more likely to be retired from the labour force. Nonetheless, he has at his disposal a higher household income than does the visitor "in general"^.
• Perhaps because he is more apt to be at the "empty nester" stage in life, he is even less likely than the "typical visitor" to be travelling with children (under 16 years) ^.
• Like the "typical visitor", however, the American tourist is unlikely to be travelling alone when he enters the parks system. In fact, he is most likely to be travelling as part of a couple.
Some Idiosyncracies of the "Typical Japanese Visitor"
• Compared to other tourists, the "typical Japanese visitor" is quite youthful. He is likely, in fact, to be under 35 years of age.
• For the most part, he travels in a couple, but is more likely than an American or Canadian to travel on his own. He also shows a marked predisposition to par- ticipate in a charter motorcoach tour through the park system.
^All income, household composition and stage in life cycle information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tabulations, Volume II).
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-21-
l: [
L L L [ [ [ [ [ [
c
r
• He is extremely reticent about sharing income information^, but indicates that he works in a professional, managerial or executive position to a greater extent than does the "typical visitor".
Some Idiosyncracies of the "Typical Skier Visitor"^
• Not surprisingly, the "winter visitor" and the "typical skier" have a great deal in common 1 He is relatively young — he probably has not yet celebrated his 45th birthday. He is also affluent and works as a professional, manager or executive.
• He drives to the parks as part of a couple or with family and friends, but he is quite unlikely to bring children along with him.
• It will be relatively difficult for him to encounter women on the slopes since three out of every four skiers he meets will be men.
• Finding men or women from countries outside Canada will also prove quite problematic for the "typical skier". Even meeting Canadians from provinces other than Alberta will be difficult, since almost all parks skiers live in this province.
^All income, household composition and stage in life cycle information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tabulations, Volume II) .
^All "skier" information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tabulations, Volume II).
Ruston/Tomony & Associates lid.
-22-
Exhibit 14
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Demographic Profile Of RocJcy Mountain National Parks Party Visitors^ To...
Any
(2,351) (1,625.5) %
An
Alberta EAIX
(2,270) (1,552.2) %
Banff
(1,738) (1,284.4) %
(1,325) (604.1) %
A
British Columbia £a£}S
(538) (305.9) %
Age'
16-24 Years 25-34 Years 35-44 Years 45-54 Years 55 Years Or More
10 27 23 18 21
10 27 23 18 20
10 27 23 18 20
7 24 19 20 28
6 22 17 22 32
AVERAGE AGE (YEARS)
42
42
42
45
46
Sex^
Male 59 60 58 62 56
Female 40 40 41 36 43
Not Stated 1 1 12 1
Occupation^ Professional/
Executive/Manager 36 36 37 36 32
Other White Collar 25 25 26 20 27
Skilled/Unskilled 18 18 16 19 13
Retired 8 8 8 12 12
Homemaker 5 5 5 6 7 Other Outside
Labour Force 5 5 6 4 5
Refused/Not Stated 3 2 3 3 4
ElSucation^ , 3 Some Secondary
Or Less 12 11 9 13 14
Completed Secondary 21 22 20 23 21
Some Post-Secondary 33 34 35 32 27
Graduated University
Or More 32 32 35 30 37
Don't Know/Not
Stated 2 1 112
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 74-1, 77-1/2, 83-2/3)
^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park. ^Projected from characteristic of survey respondent.
^Excludes winter, charter and non-English versions of the questionnaire — question not asked.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
15. a) Profile Of Visitor Parties Bv Parks Visited
The facing table provides a demographic profile of visitor parties^. Approximately one-half of all party spokes- persons for visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks are between the ages of 25 and 44 years of age (42 years, on average) .
• The parks attract individuals in their middle and older years (45 years or more — 39%) to a greater extent than they attract the relatively young traveller (under 25 years — 10%) .
• At the same time, comparatively few of the parties that visited the parks over the year are represented by individuals who are more than 64 years of age (8%) .
Males predominate among spokespersons for parties visit- ing the parks^ (59%), as do individuals who work in profession- al, managerial or other white collar occupations (61%). Almost
^These data derive from the screening questionnaire administered to a randomly selected member of a travel party who is at least 16 years of age. The party measure rather than the person measure is utilized for the demographic characteristics since the spokesperson supplied information only about him/herself rather than for each member of the travel party. These data can be supplemented by additional information on income, household composition, etc. derived from responses to the attitudinal self-completion questionnaire (See Volume III of this report — under separate cover) but these additional measures are based on a smaller sample (those who returned the self-completion ques- tionnaire) , and are, therefore, less reliable.
^This skew may be a function of the greater probability that a male would be the driver in a private vehicle, and would assume the spokesperson role for the party despite the interviewer's attempt to maintain a random selection among all adult members of the party.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-23-
L -
r"
L
one-fifth of the visitor market is engaged in skilled or unskilled occupations while retirees comprise less than one- tenth of these parties.
In keeping with their relatively high status occupations visitor parties to the Rocky Mountain National Parks tend to be represented by well-educated individuals^. Almost 2-in-3 state that they have completed some form of post secondary education, and fully l-in-3 claim to have graduated from university and/or undertaken post-graduate studies. Consistent with both their occupation and education, parks visitor parties tend to represent reasonably affluent households^.
• More than l-in-4 parties who provide income information claim to have annual incomes of at least $60,000.
• An additional 3-in-lO state that the household income falls between $40,000 and $59,999 per year.
In light of the fact that approximately l-in-2 visitor parties have no children under the age of 18 years living at home, income may be more highly "disposable" than is the case among households with children. In fact, "young singles" and "young couples", combined with "older singles" and "older couples" constitute the majority of households from which parties that visit the Rocky Mountain National Parks derive.
^Information on education was not obtained from those individuals who were asked to use a self-completion format questionnaire. These groups included winter roadside parties, and all non-English and charter parties.
^Household income, household composition, and stage in the life cycle information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-24-
Generally speaking, visitor parties to Banff and Jasper National Parks closely resemble one another in terms of age, sex, occupation and education. There are, however, some differences between them:
• Visitor party representatives in Jasper National Park tend to be slightly older than are their counterparts in Banff National Park. This age difference is reflected in the average ages (42 years versus 45 years) and in the fact that twice as many spokespersons for visitor parties in Jasper National Park are at least 65 years of age (14%) as is the case among visitor parties to Banff (7%) .
• The age difference between visitor parties to the two Alberta national parks is echoed in occupation data — the Banff visitor party is less apt to be spoken for by a retired individual (8%) than is the Jasper visitor party (12%) . Similarly, a representative of an "older couple"^ (36%) is more likely to be found among Jasper visitor parties than he or she is among visitor parties to Banff (26%).
• It is also worth noting that relative to a Jasper visitor party, the Banff visitor party is less apt to be repre- sented by a university graduate, and is slightly more apt to be represented by a skilled or unskilled labourer.
• In terms of age, stage in the life cycle, and the likelihood that the spokesperson is retired, a British
-^Life cycle data derive from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II) . For key life cycle figures, see summary table appended in this report.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-25-
L [ L [ [ [ C [ [
c c c
[ [ c
[ [ [ [
Columbia national parks visitor party more closely resembles parties that spend time, money or go sightseeing in Jasper than in Banff National Park.
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
Exhibit 15
Actual
Weighted/Projected In Thousands
Denographic Profile Of RcK:ky Moxintain National Par)cs Party Visitors^ To Any Park —
In
(2,351) (1,625.5) %
In. . .Season^
(1,189) (612.0) %
Fflll yintgr Spring
(390) (394)
(240.2)
(378) (180.1) (593.2)
Age-
16-24 Years 25-34 Years 35-44 Years 45-54 Years 55 Years Or More
10 27 23 18 21
11 24 19 18 26
11 23 21 13 31
8 33 26 18 14
13 22 27 19 18
AVERAGE AGE (YEARS)
42
43
45
40
41
Sex
Male 59 51 60 63 71
Female 40 47 39 37 28
Not Stated 12 1*1
Occupation^ Professional/
Executive/Manager 36 31 30 47 27
Other White Collar 25 23 22 26 33
S)cilled/Uns)cilled 18 18 16 17 19
Retired 8 10 21 2 7
Homemaker 5 8 3 5 2 Other Outside Labour
Force 5 5 6 3 10
Refused/Not Stated 3 5 3*2
Some Secondary Or Less 12 12 13 N/A 13
Completed Secondary 21 21 22 N/A 22
Some PoBt-Secondary 33 29 34 N/A 39 Graduated University
Or More 32 37 28 N/A 25
Don't Know/Not Stated 2 13 N/A 2
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 74-4/5, 77-5/6, 83-9/11)
^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks, ^see Foreword for definition of seasons. ^Projected from characteristic of survey respondent. ^Excludes winter, charter and non-English versions of the
questionnaire — question not asked.
*Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
15. b) Profile Of Visitor Parties Bv Season
When visitor party profiles are compared across seasons, it becomes clear that summer and winter differ quite significantly.
• By and large, the summer visitor party is represented by individuals who are older, who are almost as likely to be female as to be male and who show no special propensity to be working in professional, executive or managerial positions .
• Conversely, the winter visitor party could be char- acterized by its relative youthfulness and its up-scale occupational status — two features closely associated with downhill skiers (see profile of the "typical skier". Section 14) .
Almost l-in-2 of these winter parties are represented by professionals, managers, or executives compared to about l-in-3 during the summer. While just over 4-in-lO summer parties are comprised of individuals in the 25 to 44 years age group, almost 6-in-lO (59%) of the winter parties fall into this age range. Young singles (9%) and young couples (24%) are also considerably more likely to be found in the Rocky Mountain National Parks during the winter season than they are in any other^.
The winter market also displays a male skew — more than 6-in-lO of these visitor parties are spoken for by a male, compared to 5-in-lO during the summer season.
^Life cycle data derive from the self -completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II) .
Ihiston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-27-
L -
L-
Age information on the table facing the previous page suggests that the two shoulder seasons more closely resemble the peak season immediately preceding them than they resemble one another. For example, fall is more analogous to summer in terms of its strength of appeal to the older visitor (55 years of age or more) , whereas winter and spring are similar in their lack of appeal to the older age group and their strengths among visi- tors who are under 45 years of age.
It is worth noting that the fall is most appealing to retirees — approximately one-fifth of this season's visi- tation falls into this older sector of the tourism market. These individuals may have the luxury of scheduling their Rocky Mountain National Parks holiday once "families" are home and children have returned to school after the Labour Day weekend.
The other singularly interesting seasonal variation evident from the data shown on the preceding table is the prominence of males among spring visitor party representatives. Fully 7-in-lO of these parties are represented by a male, com- pared to less than 6-in-lO over the full year and to about 5-in-lO in the summer.
Because of the types of differences noted in this discussion, consideration should be given to the wisdom of conceptualizing the Rocky Mountain National Parks as having "three seasons" — summer, winter, and shoulder. If the markets to which spring and fall appeal are quite different, and there is interest in furthering utilization of the park system during these low utilization periods of the year, the unique characteristics of each ought to be highlighted rather than obscured by merging the two "shoulders" into a single season.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-28-
:hibit 16
Party Composition Of Rocky Mountain National Parks Visitor Parties^ To...
A
An British
|
Any Park |
Alberta park |
panff |
Jasper |
Columbia park |
|
|
;tual iighted/Projected, n Thousands |
(2,351) (1,625.5) % |
(2,270) (1,552.2) % |
(1,738) (1,284.4) % |
(1,325) (604.1) % |
(538) (305.9) % |
|
^arty Composition |
|||||
|
Adult Only |
79 |
79 |
80 |
78 |
81 |
|
With Any Under 16 Years |
21 |
21 |
20 |
23 |
19 |
Average Number Df . . . In Party
Adults (16+) Teens/Children
(<16) Visitors (Any Age)
1
2.1 0.4 2.5
I
2.1 0.4 2.5
#
2.1 0.3 2.5
«
2.2 0.4 2.6
1
2.1 0.3 2.4
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 4-2, 6-2, 8-2, 83-3) Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
16. a) Party Size And Composition Bv Parks Visited
Of the 1.6 million parties that spent time, money or went sightseeing within the boundaries of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks, about 1.3 million were comprised of adults only. The remaining 2-in-lO visitor parties were composed of both adults and individuals under 16 years of age. Despite the propensity for adult-only parties, the average size for visitor parties over the full year is 2.5 individuals (2.1 adults and 0.4 children/teens under 16).
Party size and composition are uniform across the four Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-29-
>chibit 17
Party Composition Of Rocky Mountain National Parks Visitor Parties^ To Any Park...
|
In |
In. . .Season^ |
||||
|
Total |
Summer |
Fall |
Winter |
Sprinq |
|
|
ctual |
(2,351) |
(1,189) |
(378) |
(390) |
(394) |
|
p i aht ed /Proi ected |
|||||
|
In Thousands |
(1,625.5) |
(612.0) |
(180.1) |
(593.2) |
(240.2) |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
Party Composition |
|||||
|
Adult Only |
79 |
72 |
91 |
82 |
80 |
|
With Any Under |
|||||
|
16 Years |
21 |
28 |
9 |
18 |
20 |
|
Average Number |
|||||
|
In Partv |
1 |
« |
# |
« |
# |
|
Adults (16+) |
2.1 |
2.2 |
2.0 |
2.1 |
2.2 |
|
Teens/Children |
|||||
|
(<16) |
0.4 |
0.5 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|
Visitors |
|||||
|
(Any Age) |
2.5 |
2.7 |
2.2 |
2.4 |
2.5 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 4-5/6, 6-6, 8-6; 83-10)
■-Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
^Mountain National Parks.
•See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
16. b) Party Size And Composition Bv Season
Not surprisingly, visitor party composition and size differ by season, with the summer (28%) attracting a higher proportion of parties with children (under 16 years) than is evident in any other season. This season's average party size is also correspondingly larger (2.7) than is the case in fall, winter, or spring.
While the summer may attract more parties with children than does any other season, the fall is the least likely to support visitor parties comprised of both adults and children. In this season, 9-in-lO parties are adult-only. This finding may reflect the fact that the fall season attracts a higher proportion of retirees and includes no major school holiday periods whereas Christmas, March school break and Easter fall within the winter season, and Victoria Day is included in the survey definition of spring.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-30-
chibit 18
ctual
eighted/Projected, In Thousands
Place Of Residence Of Rocky Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ To...
Any park
(2,351) (4,084.0) %
An
Alberta park
(2,270)
(3,898.6)
%
Jasper (1,325)
(1,738) (3,167.5) (1,598.9)
A British
Columbia
Park
(538)
(748.3)
%
Jiy Canada
80
79
76
65
58
British Columbia
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
Atlantic Provinces
10 59 5 3 3 1 *
9 58 5 3 4 1 *
7 58 5 3 3 1
14 38 5 2 4 2
10 39 4 2 2 * *
iny U.S.A
14
15
17
25
29
Overseas Japan
West Germany United Kingdom
11
14
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-1/2)
'•Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park. kLess than 0.5%.
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud. ■
17. a) Place Of Residence By Parks Visited
Canadians predominate among the 4.1 million person visitors to the four Rocky Mountain National Parks. Eight out of every ten men, women and children who visit the park system name a Canadian city or town as their home. Given the parks* geographical location, it is not surprising that Alberta is the single largest contributor of parks visitors (59%) . The United States is also a significant source for tourism to the four mountain parks. This country is "home" to one in every seven individuals who visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988.
Just over l-in-20 (6%) visitors to the four parks live outside Canada and the United States. The most important overseas tourism markets for the Rocky Mountain National Parks currently include Japan, West Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia .
Within the domestic market. Alberta is followed by British Columbia (10%) , Saskatchewan (5%) , and Manitoba (3%) in terms of generating tourism in the parks. Interestingly, the two most populous provinces in the country — Ontario and Quebec — make only very modest contributions to the tourist mix within the four parks (3% and 1%, respectively).
Within Alberta, the two major metropolitan areas contri- bute quite significantly to the visitor base. Specifically, Calgary houses almost 3-in-lO visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks (29%) , while Edmonton is the place of residence of a further 1-in-lO (13%) . Not surprisingly, no other city even remotely approaches this level of tourism to the parks
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-31-
[
c [ [ [ [ [ [ c r r r r r r r
system. The Rocky Mountain National Parks seem to be a "recreational area of choice" for the Calgary resident. A comparison of the metropolitan population and the number of person visits that derive from this city over the year suggest that Calgarians make multiple trips to the park over the twelve months .
Forty-five of the fifty states in the United States are represented among parks visitors. Those with the most signi- ficant impact on tourism within the Rocky Mountain National Parks include Washington, California, Montana and Ohio.
Variations in the origin of visitors to specific parks within the four park system include the following:
• To a greater extent than is the case in other parks, Banff National Park's annual visitor base is dominated by Canadians, and especially by Albertans. This finding may be related to the passage of the Trans- Canada Highway through Banff's boundaries — the park is on a 'natural* route for Canadian travellers, and to Banff's proximity to the Calgary market.
• Jasper National Park, on the other hand, is not suf- ficiently close to Edmonton (or any other major popu- lation centre) to facilitate "same-day visitors". Consequently, travel to this park may require a more purposeful decision to visit and/or a commitment to spend at least one night away from home than is the case with respect to Banff.
• The proportion of domestic visitors is significantly smaller in Jasper (65%) and the British Columbia
■ -32- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
L
L L L L L L L
L
L. [.
[.
C
[
r
r
L
national parks (58%) than it is in Banff (76%). This finding highlights the relative importance of the U.S.A. and overseas markets to Jasper and to British Columbia parks. Such importance does not, however, minimize the impact of foreign visitors on Banff National Park.
• For example, Banff National Park hosts approximately nine out of every ten visitors who came to the parks system from the United States, and almost all over- seas visitors. The table^ below illustrates the relative "draw" of the various parks among visitors from outside Canada.
Exhibit 19
|
Proportion of All |
Foreian Visitors |
From . . |
•Hosted By. . . |
|
Banff |
Jasper |
British Columbia Parks |
|
|
United States |
91% |
69% |
37% |
|
Overseas |
96% |
74% |
45% |
^Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-1/2.
-33-
■
Suston Aomany Ir Associates lid.
.ual
ghted/Pr ejected , Thousands
Place Of Residence Of Rocky Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ To Any Park...
In
Total (2,351) (4,084.0) %
In. . .Season^
gyTTimer (1,189)
(390)
(378)
(1,646.1) (391.8) (1,441.5)
Spring (394) (604 .6) %
y Canada
British ColuirJDia
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
Atlantic Provinces
80
68
75
94
84
10 59 5 3 3 1
11 45 6 2 5 1 *
15 48 3 1 6 1 *
5 77 4 5 1 1 1
12 61 5 1 3 2
ly U.S. A
14
25
14
ly Overseas Japan
West Germany United Kingdom
11
10
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 12-5/6)
[pent time, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
lountain National Parks.
lee Foreword for definition of seasons.
^ss than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
17. b) Place Of Residence By Season
Seasonal information on the tourism mix for the Rocky Mountain National Parks suggests that Canada as a whole, and especially Alberta are primary markets for all seasons, but exercise a more dramatic impact during the winter:
• In the course of this five month season, more than 9-in-lO visitors to the park system are Canadians, with more than 3-in-4 living in Alberta.
The popularity of the summer and fall seasons in the Rocky Mountain National Parks among foreign travellers is also immediately apparent. These seasons attract disproportionately high levels of foreign tourists, both from the United States and overseas. The seasonal contrasts are most dramatic when the summer and/or fall seasons are compared with utilization by foreign travellers in the winter.
• While l-in-4 summer visitors live in the United States, only l-in-20 winter visitors come to the park system from this country.
• In fact, almost 3-in-4 (72%) of all visitors from the United States come to the parks during the summer season.
These findings suggest that more strenuous efforts to market the Rocky Mountain National Parks as a winter, or all-season des- tination might be targeted directly to the U.S. market.
The decline in winter visitation vis-a-vis summer is also evident in the tourist influx to the parks from overseas.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-34-
L
L L L L L L [ [ [ C [ [
c,
r
r
r
L
• Overseas markets send more than l-in-20 sumner
visitors but only l-in-50 winter visitors to the four Rocky Mountain National Parks.
It is also worth noting that the proportions of overseas visitors in the two shoulder seasons are higher than in the "peak" summer season (1-in-lO fall and spring visitors live outside Canada and the United States) .
Of all the overseas groups in the sample, it would seem that Japanese visitors are least affected by season. Bearing in mind the relatively small samples of overseas visitors in the study, there are at least directional indications to suggest that the Japanese tourist flow is steady throughout the year (see Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 13-41 for figures) .
■ -35- Ruston/ToxTvmy & Associates Ud.
u
■xhibit 21
Mode Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks Among Person Visitors^ To...
L L L
Any Park
An
Alberta
Banff
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
Any Private Vehicle
Recreational Vehicle/Motorhome
Scheduled Bus
Scheduled Train
Overnight Charter Motorcoach
Jasper (1,325)
(2,351) (2,270) (1,738)
(4,084.0) (3,898.6) (3,167.5) (1,598.9)
93
92
92
86
10
A
British Columbia [ Park ^
(538) 1^
(748.3)
• L
88
10
11
[ [ [ [ [ c
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 72-1/2) ^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park.
c c
r
r
Riiston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
C. VISIT CHARACTERISTICS OF VISITORS TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
18. a) Node Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Parks Visited
Private vehicles are, by far, the roost favoured mode of entry to the four Rocky Mountain National Parks. More than 9-in-lO visitors to this geographical entity, or more than 3.8 million individuals, come to the parks in automobiles, pick-up trucks, truck campers, motorhomes or vans. Approximately 60,000 visitors arrive in the parks* bus depots, and just slightly fewer utilize scheduled train service (56,000). According to survey estimates, overnight chartered motorcoach passengers constitute about one-twentieth of parks visitors over the year (about 190,000 individuals).
Visitors to specific parks do not differ dramatically in the manner in which they enter the four park boundaries^, although the information suggests that:
• Jasper and British Columbia national parks visitors are more apt to have entered the park system via
^Mode of entry is established on the basis of the manner in which individuals enter the Rocky Mountain National Parks system. The mode of entry to individual parks once a visitor is inside the park system is not measured by this study.
For example: Assume a charter passenger is interviewed as he/ she boards the charter bus in Banff. This individual is consi- dered to have entered (and exited) the four park system via charter. If he or she rents a car and drives to Jasper and Yoho National Parks, the traveller would be considered a "visitor to three parks (Banff, Jasper, and Yoho) who entered the Rocky Mountain National Park via charter". Thus, the table on the facing page displays the proportion of visitors to each park who came to (and from) the Rockv Mountain National Parks via specific modes.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-36-
L
L
[
L L [ L [ C [ [ C
c [ [ r [ [
charter motorcoach than is the case for Banff National Park; and
• Recreational vehicles or motorhomes are more likely to be utilized by visitors to the British Columbia parks (10%) than to Jasper (5%) or Banff National Parks (3%).
When the composition of park visitors is examined within each entry mode group, differences across the four parks become more apparent.
• Private Vehicle Visitors
Almost all vehicular visitors are tourists in one of the Alberta parks. More than 3-in-4 of them are Banff visitors and more than l-in-3 are Jasper National Park visitors. Of all visitors who enter the parks system in a private vehicle, fewer than 2-in-lO spend time, money or go sightseeing in the two British Columbia parks.
Although the base size is quite small, it would seem that visitors who come to the parks in a recreational vehicle or motorhome are almost equally distributed across the parks (Banff — 66%; Jasper — 59%; British Columbia parks — 53%).
• Charter Visitors
Of the 190,000 overnight charter visitors to the parks system, approximately 160,000 visit Banff National Park and the same number visit Jasper National Park during their trip. This finding likely reflects the structure of many charter tours to the parks — they include one or two nights in each of these
-37
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
L
L L L L I t t [
r
r r r r r r
I
two parks. British Columbia parks, on the other hand, attract about one-half the number of charter visitors that spend time, money or sightsee in the Alberta parks. Just over 81,000 charter visitors claim to have visited a British Columbia park during their trip.
• Scheduled Train Visitors
Almost all scheduled train visitors also constitute Banff National Park visitors (96%) , whereas Jasper National Park attracts only about 6-in-lO (58%) of these individuals. People who enter the park system on the train are, however, relatively unlikely to include either British Columbia park on their itinerary within the Rocky Mountain National Parks (14%) .
• Scheduled Bus Visitors
Scheduled bus visitors strongly resemble train visitors in their movements within the parks. More than 8-in-lO of these bus travellers are visitors to Banff National Park, while just over 4-in-lO visit Jasper National Park. The British Columbia parks seem even less likely to attract scheduled bus visitors (8%) than they are to attract those who travelled to the parks by train.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-38-
-chibit 22
Mode Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks Among Person Visitors^ To Any Park. . .
:tual
sighted/Projected; En Thousands
In
Total (2,351) (4,084.0) %
In. . . Season^
Suimner (1,189) (1,646.1) %
(378) (391.8) %
Winter (390) (1,441.5) %
Spring (394) (604.6) %
Any Private Vehicle
Recreational Vehicle/ Motorhoine
93
92
92
95
90
Scheduled Bus
Scheduled Train
Overnight Charter Motorcoach
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 72-5/6)
Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks.
See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
18. b) Mode Of Entry To The Rocky Mountain National Parks By
Season
Time of year does not appear to have a significant impact on the mode of transportation used by park visitors. At the same time, the roadways within the parks are more likely to be carrying recreational vehicle visitors in the summer (7%) than in any other season. Additionally, train travellers are es- pecially likely to be found in the fall (3%) and spring (4%) but the overnight charter contribution to total park visitation (as a proportion of visitors) is relatively stable irrespective of season.
When mode of entry is assessed from a different pers- pective, it becomes evident that approximately one-half of all charter visitors to the park system come in the summer (4 8%) , one-quarter are winter visitors (27%) , and the remainder are divided between fall (8%) , and to a greater extent, spring (17%) . It is also interesting to note that these charter visitors are more likely to be residents of the United States (43%) than of any other country, including Canada (27%) and Japan (24%) . Train travellers are also especially likely to be Americans (41%) or travellers from overseas (31%) .
These findings become even more meaningful when compared to the proportion of total visitation represented by the various countries (see following table) .
Ruston/Tomony & Associates Ltd.
L L [ [ [
r r r r r
r r
Exhibit 23
Proportion Of Entry Node Visitors Who Live In Specific Coxintries
Country of Residence
Proportion of Total
Any
panada V.S.A. Qverseas^- Japan
Person Visitors
80
14
Private Vehicle Visitors %
Charter Visitors %
Scheduled Train Visitors %
Scheduled Bus Visitors %
84
27
28 46
12 43
41
23
4
30
31 31
24
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 72-3)
^Includes Japan. Horizontal percentage exceeds 100% because Japanese visitors are also included in "Any Overseas".
'40'
Ruston/Tomany & Associates LW.
Exhibit 24
|
Rocky Mountain National Parks As Main Destination Of Entire Trip Aaong Person Visitors^ To... |
|||||
|
Any |
An Alberta ParK |
A British Columbia |
|||
|
Actual Weighted/Projected , In Thousands |
(2.351) (4,084.0) |
(2,270) (3,898.6) |
(1,738) (3,167.5) |
(1.325) (1,598.9) |
(538) (748.3) |
|
% |
% % |
||||
|
Yes, Rocky Mountain National Parks Is Main Destination |
61 |
62 |
64 |
54 |
56 |
|
No, Rocky Mountain National Parks Is Not Main Destination |
39 |
38 |
36 |
46 |
44 |
|
Rocky Mountain National Parks As Main Destination Of Entire Trip Aaong Person Visitors^ To Any Park... |
|||
|
In. . .Season^ |
|||
|
In Total SviTuner , |
f?ll , |
Winter gprinq |
|
|
Actual Weighted/Projected , In Thousands |
(2,351) (1,189) (4,084.0) (1,646.1) |
(378) (391.8) |
(390) (394) (1,441.5) (604.6) |
|
% % |
% |
% % |
|
|
Yes, Rocky Mountain National Parks Is Main Destination |
61 53 |
60 |
67 69 |
|
No, Rocky Mountain National Parks Is Hfii Main Destination |
39 47 |
40 |
33 31 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 20-1, 3)
^Spent time, Boney, or vent sightseeing in specific park/at least one
of the Rocky Mountain National Parks. ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/TomanY & Associates lid.
19. The Rocky Mountain National Parks As The Main Destination Of Entire Trip
The Rocky Mountain National Parks is designated the "main destination" of the entire trip by 6-in-lO visitors. Such a distinction is most apt to be utilized by visitors to Banff National Park (64%) . Among visitors to Jasper National Park and to the British Columbia parks, just over l-in-2 declare the national parks system to be the main destination of their entire trip.
Seasonal variation is somewhat more extensive than is variation by park. Specifically, summer visitors are least in- clined to consider the national parks system their main desti- nation, with just over l-in-2 doing so. In contrast, at least 2-in-3 winter and spring visitors to the four Rocky Mountain National Parks deem them to be the main destination of the entire trip.
The two "park provinces". Alberta and British Columbia, are the most commonly cited "furthest destinations" from home^ for visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks. In fact, 2-in-3 of these visitors claim that the trip which brought them to the parks will take them no further from home than Alberta, and a further l-in-4 make this claim with respect to British Columbia. Approximately l-in-20 visitors indicate that their furthest destination from home will take them to locations within the United States.
Not surprisingly, almost all travellers who deem the parks to be the main destination of their entire trip declare
See Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 16-5/6 for figures.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-41-
c [ [ c
L
c [ [ [ [ c r
r r
r
Alberta (84%) or British Columbia (13%) to be the furthest place from home they would visit on the trip. The proportions differ somewhat among visitors who maintain that the Rocky Mountain National Parks was not the main destination of the trip that brought them into the parks. These travellers are particularly likely to designate Alberta (41%) , British Columbia (44%) , and, to a lesser extent, the United States (10%) as their "furthest" destination.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-42-
Exhibit 25
Annual And S«aBon«l Farvon Kntranta And Parson Viaitora^ To Tba Roclcy Mountain National Parlia
Annual fijju&tl LaU HinlML SBCinq
Four Parks^
|
Entrant* Vititora |
5,513,100 4,064,000 |
(A) (B) |
2,151,500 1,646, 100 |
(C) (E) |
596,200 391,800 |
(C) (F) |
1,954,900 1,441,500 |
(E) (C) |
810,500 604,600 |
(P) |
|
Converaion Of Entranta To Viaitora |
74% |
77% |
66% |
74% |
75% |
Alberta Parka
|
Entranta Viaitora |
5,443,300 3,898,600 |
(D) (C) |
2, 121,700 1,551,800 |
(D (E) |
581,600 355, 100 |
(E) (E) |
1, 1, |
934,900 403, 100 |
(E) (D) |
805, 100 588, 500 |
(F) (C)« |
|
Converaion Of Entranta To Visitora |
72% |
73% |
61% |
73% |
73% |
Banff National Park
|
Entrants Visitors |
4. 635, 100 3 , 167, 500 |
(C) (D) |
1,816, 200 1,203,100 |
(D) (A) |
532,900 310, 000 |
(F) |
1,613 ,700 1, 166, 000 |
(E) (E) |
672,400 488.500 |
(D) (G) « |
|
Converaion Of Entranta To Viaitora |
68% |
66% |
58% |
72% |
73% |
Jasper National Park
|
Entrants Visitors |
1,981.700 1 , 598 , 900 |
(D) (F) |
1 , 056, 300 907 , 100 |
(G)* (G) * |
194 ,700 142 , 100 |
(F) (F) |
446, 100 336,900 |
(F) (E) |
284 ,700 212 , 900 |
(F) (C) |
|
Conversion Of Entrants To Visitors |
81% |
86% |
73% |
76% |
75% |
British Coluiftbia Parks
|
Entrants Visitors |
2,490,900 748, 300 |
(B) (G)* |
1,247,000 487 ,200 |
(D) (A) |
320, 500 86, 300 |
(F) (H)** |
585, 400 67,200 |
(E) (H)*« |
337,900 107 , 600 |
(F) (G) • |
|
Conversion Of Entranta To Viaitora |
30% |
39% |
27% |
11% |
32% |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Voluae I, page 82-1/3)
^"Annual" study period: June 15, 1987 to June 14, 1988. See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Person Entranta are thoaa who entered a apecific park. Peraon viaitora spent ti«e, aoney or
went aightaeeing in a apecific park. 2A11 figurea are walghtad/projactad and rounded to the naareat hundred. See Detailed Tablea, Voluae I
for unweightad baaea by seaaon and park.
•"Qualified number": Uae with extreae caution.
•"Unpubliahabla number" by Statiatica Canada'a atandarda: Do not use.
Ruston/Tomony & Associates lid.
20. Entrants And Visitors To The Rocky Mountain National Parks Bv Parks And Season .
The facing table provides the total number of individuals who entered each park, the number who claimed to be visitors to each according to the survey definition^, and the proportion of all possible visitors (entrants) that are converted to visitors for each park^. The conversion of entrants to visitors for the June 1987 to June 1988 year is discussed in Chapter A, Section 4 of this report. Here the focus is on seasonal variation in conversion of entrants to visitors.
Taking the four parks as a whole, the figures suggest that summer (77%) is not significantly more successful than are winter (74%) and spring (75%) in enticing individuals passing through the park system to spend time, money or to sightsee. Of all the seasons, fall (66%) is the time period in which the highest proportion of park entrants simply "pass through" the system.
Differences over the year are clearly evident when the conversion rates between Banff and Jasper National Parks are compared. Banff enjoys a slightly higher conversion rate in winter (72%) than it does during the summer period (66%) . Like Banff, Jasper National Park is quite successful in converting
•*-For the Rocky Mountain National Parks system as a whole, a visitor is defined as a person who spent time, money or went sightseeing within the four park boundaries. A visitor to an individual park is defined as a person who engaged in these activities within the boundaries of the specific park.
^Survey data suggest that on key demographic characteristics, the profile of the park system "entrant" does not differ substantively from the profile of the park system "visitor". See Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 76-1,2 and 81-1/6.
H -43- Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
L [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [
r r
r
winter entrants to visitors (76%) , but its special strength would seem to be in encouraging summer travellers to spend time, money or sightsee within its boundaries (86%) .
Likely because they do not offer downhill skiing oppor- tunities, the British Columbia parks attract only about 1-in-lO visitors from the individuals who pass through their territory in the winter. These parks experience their highest levels of utilization by available travellers in the summer (39%) , and to a lesser extent, in the spring (32%) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-44-
Exhibit 26
Park Visitation Patterns Among Person Visitors^ To The Rocky Mountain National Parks...
|
fill |
Winter |
gprinq |
|||
|
Actual Weighted/Projected , In Thousands (604 .6) |
(2,351) (4 , 084 .0) |
(1,189) (1,646. |
(378) 1) |
(390) (391.8) |
(394 ) (1,441. |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
Visited Any Alberta Park |
96 |
94 |
91 |
97 |
97 |
|
Visited Banff National Park |
78 |
73 |
79 |
81 |
81 |
|
Visited Banff National Park Only |
50 |
30 |
50 |
72 |
54 |
|
Visited Jasper National Park |
39 |
55 |
36 |
23 |
35 |
|
Visited Jasper National Park Only |
17 |
20 |
11 |
16 |
16 |
|
Visited Any British Columbia Park |
18 |
30 |
22 |
5 |
IB |
|
Visited Yoho National Park |
10 |
18 |
10 |
3 |
10 |
|
Visited Yoho National Park Only |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
* |
|
visitea j^ootenay National Park |
10 |
17 |
15 |
2 |
10 |
|
Visited Kootenay National Park Only |
3 |
3 |
7 |
2 |
3 |
|
Visited All Pour Parks |
2 |
3 |
3 |
* |
2 |
|
(Source: |
Detailed Tables, |
Volume I |
, pages 28- |
-7/8) |
|
|
^Spent time, aoney Mountain National |
or vent sightseeing in at Parks . |
least one |
Of the Rocky |
♦Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
21. Multiple Park Utilization In The Rocky Mountain National Parks
The total visitation to each of the four Rocky Mountain National Parks is described in Chapter A, Section 3 of this report. The facing table provides information on exclusive visitors to individual parks. Almost all men, women and children who spent time, money or went sightseeing within the four parks' boundaries visited an Alberta national park. Of these two parks, Banff National Park is the more popular, attracting in excess of three out of every four visitors to the park system.
Banff is also the park most likely to attract exclusive visitors. One in every two, or 2 . 1 million park visitors over the year utilize Banff National Park only. Jasper National Park attracts about 4-in-lO annual visitors, but generates exclusive usage among fewer than 2-in-lO (0.7 million).
Visitation to any British Columbia park is characteristic of almost 2-in-lO yearly visitors, but the two Rocky Mountain parks in this province are quite unlikely to attract exclusive users (Yoho — 2%; Kootenay — 3%).
The pattern of multiple or single park visitation differs quite dramatically by season. In the summer more than 4-in-lO visitors (44%) to the parks visit more than one of the parks. In the winter season, however, very few (less than 10%) parks visitors include more than one of the four parks in their itinerary. That is to say, in the winter months, approximately 9-in-lO parks visitors go to only one of the parks when they visit the Rocky Mountain National Parks. This change in behaviour is particularly noticeable for Banff National Park.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-45-
L
L L L [ [ [ [ [ [ [
r r
[ r
In the summertime, about 3-in-lO parks visitors spend time, money or sightsee only in Banff. In the winter season, as many as 7-in-lO parks visitors patronize Banff exclusively.
The multiple/exclusive park visitation patterns in the shoulder seasons fall between the extremes noted for summer and winter.
Ruston/Tomony & Associates Ltd.
-46-
Exhibit 27
Length Of Visit To The RcxrJcv Mountain National Parks ABong Person Visitors^ To...
An A British
Any Alberta Coluir±)ia
Park Park Banff Jagp?r Park
Actual (2,351) (2,270) (1,738) (1,325) (538)
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands (4,084.0) (3,898.6) (3,167.5) (1,598.9) (748.3)
% % % % %
SAME-DAY
No Nights Spent In Parks 44 43 42 31 32
No Nights Spent Away From Home
On Entire Trip 20 21 22 8 3
Nights Spent Away From Home But No Nights
Spent In Parks 24 23 20 23 29
OVERNIGHT
Nights In Parks
1-2 Nights 37 37 37 36 34
3-6 Nights 17 18 19 30 29
7 Or More Nights 2 2 2 4 6
Average Nuaber Of Nights Per Person
Visitor... « « I « «
In Total 1.4 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.4
Who Spent Any Nights Away From
Hone On Trip 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5
Who Spent Any Nights In The Rocky Mountain
National Parks 2.6 2.6 2.7 3.0 3.5
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 37-1/2) H ^Spent tine, money, or went »ightseeing in specific park.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
22. a) Length Of Visit To The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Parks Visited
As has been noted previously (Chapter A) , more than 4-in-lO Rocky Mountain National Parks visitors restrict their visit to the parks to a single day while the remaining 6-in-lO (56%) spend at least one night within the park system. The 1.8 million same-day visitors are evenly divided between those who spend no nights away from home on their entire trip (0.8 million) and those who do spend nights away from home but do not spend any nights within the boundaries of the four parks (1.0 million) .
Visitors to Jasper National Park and the two British Columbia parks are more likely to spend nights within the parks system than are visitors to Banff National Park. This finding may relate to the comparatively heavy use of Banff by Calgarians (see Section 17. a). A trip from Calgary to Banff National Park for recreational use can be undertaken in a day without undue strain. Jasper National Park, on the other hand, is not as easily accessible for day use by Edmontonians . Similarly, the British Columbia parks are not within easy "same-day" driving distance of a major urban centre.
Among all visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks, the average length of stay within the system is 1.4 nights (based on same-day and overnight visitors) . Among overnight visitors to the parks, this average increases to 2.6 nights, or a total of 6.1 million person nights (2.5 million party nights).
Perhaps because it is further from a major metropolitan centre, and/or because it is not on the Trans-Canada traffic corridor, Jasper National Park achieves slightly longer stays
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-47-
Exhibit 28
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Average Length Of Stay In Number Of Nights Among Person Visitors^ To The Rocky Mountain National Parks . . .
In
Total
(2,351) (4,084.0) #
Who Spent Any Nights In The Parks
(1,581)
(2,288.0)
#
Total
1.4
2.6
Place Of Residence Canada Alberta
British Columbia Other Canada
U.S.A.
Overseas
1.0
1.0 0.9 1.6
2.7 3.9
2.1
1.9 2.1 2.7
3.4 4.1
Mode Of Entrv
Private Vehicle Scheduled Train/Bus Overnight Charter
1.3 3.8 3.5
2.4 4.4 3.5
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 37-4, 42-1)
^Spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomony & Associates lid.
among its overnight visitors (3.0 nights) than does Banff National Park (2.7) .
Although there are relatively few of them in total, overnight visitors to the British Columbia parks tend to stay longer than do visitors to any other park (3.5 nights).
Other interesting findings related to length of stay include the following:
• The greater the distance from home, the longer the park visit.
For example, Canadians spend, on average, one night in the Rocky Mountain National Parks. This average doubles (2.1 nights) when calculated only on Canadians who spend any nights in the parks. Because they represent such a large proportion of all Canadian parks visitors, the respective averages for Albertans and British Columbians are almost identical to those for Canadians as a whole. Canadians who live in other provinces, however, spend an average of 1.6 nights in the parks (based on total) or 2.7 nights among "overnighters" .
Visitors who live in the United States spend 2.7 nights in the parks, on average. Among American overnight^ visitors to the parks system, this average increases to 3.4 nights.
Travellers who come the longest distance to visit the parks — those from overseas — spend an average of four nights within the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-48-
L P
r L
[
[
L [ [ [ [ C C
r c c [ [
• Park visitors travelling in private vehicles sp>end fewer nights in the parks than do those travelling by bus, train or charter motorcoach.
Among overnight parks visitors, the average length of stay for passengers of private vehicles is 2.4 nights, while the corresponding figure for bus or train passengers is 4.4 nights. Charter motorcoach visitors fall between these two groups, spending 3.5 nights, on average, in the parks system.
• Length of stay in the parks does not appear to vary appreciEd)ly by the type of acconunodation utilized.
When evaluated by the type of accommodation used while in the parks system, the data suggest that commercial roofed accommodation users (2.5) and campers (2.7) closely resemble one another in terms of the average number of nights they spend in the parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-49-
Exhibit 29
Length Of Visit To The Roclcy Mountain National Parks ABong Person Visitors^ To Any Park...
|
Tctfll |
Fall |
Spring |
||||
|
factual Weighted/Projected, In Thousands |
(2 (4 |
,351) ,084 .0} |
(1,189) (1,646.1) |
(378) (391.8) |
(390) (1.441.5) |
(394) (604.6) |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
||
|
SAME-DAY |
||||||
|
No Nights Spent In Parks |
44 |
42 |
44 |
39 |
60 |
|
|
No Nights Spent Away From Home On Entire Trip |
20 |
12 |
22 |
22 |
37 |
|
|
Nights Spent Away From Home But No Nights Spent In Parks |
24 |
31 |
23 |
17 |
22 |
|
|
OVERNIGHT |
||||||
|
Niahts In Parks |
||||||
|
1-2 Nights 3-6 Nights 7 Or More Nights |
37 17 2 |
30 25 3 |
38 16 2 |
48 11 1 |
27 11 2 |
|
|
Average NuBber Of Nights Per Person Visitor! |
« |
# |
f |
1 |
# |
|
|
In Total |
1.4 |
1.7 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
1.1 |
|
|
Who Spent Any Nights |
1.8 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
1.7 |
1.7 |
|
|
Who Spent Any Nights In The Rocky Mountain National Parks |
2.6 |
3.0 |
2.4 |
2.1 |
2.7 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 37-5/6)
Spent time, money, or vent sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks.
•See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
22. b) Length Of Visit To The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Season
Spring visitors, to a greater extent than those in any other season, are same-day users of the Rocky Mountain National Parks. Six-in-ten of these visitors in late April, May and early June do not spend a night within the boundaries of the four parks, compared to approximately 4-in-lO in each other season.
Although the proportion of summer visitors who do not spend nights in the parks is similar to that evident for winter and fall, the summer same-day park visitor is considerably more likely to be spending some nights away from home on the trip — but not in the parks — than is the case in the other seasons. The propensity of the summer overnight traveller to utilize the parks on a same-day basis may derive from several factors.
• Firstly, summer visitors are more likely than any other season's visitors to depict their entire trip as a tour- ing vacation^ — they visit the parks system, and then move on to another destination. This explanation is supported by the finding that the summer visitor is least likely to declare the Rocky Mountain National Parks to be the "main destination" of the trip (see Section 19) .
• Secondly, a number of summer visitors may spend nights in the vicinity of the national parks, but according to survey rules, these nights are not attributed to the parks (to qualify as a night spent in the parks, the
^This information derives from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II, page 62-3).
B -50- Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
c [ [ [ [ [ [ [ c [ [ [ [ c c
r
L [
c
location of an overnight stop must be within the official boundaries of the four parks) .
Summer visitors who i|o spend nights within the boundaries of the Rocky Mountain National Parks stay for an average of three nights. The winter visitor has a shorter stay within the parks — he or she spends two nights, on average. The average number of nights spent by overnight visitors in the fall and spring is between two and three nights.
Ruston/Toxnany & Associates lid.
-51-
L
L L
r
L
L L
[ [ [ C C
c [ c c
L
c
D.
ACCOMMODATION IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
23 . The "Typical Guest" And The "Typical Camper"
In this summary section, profiles of the "typical guest" in the parks' hotels, motels, and resorts and the "typical camper" are provided. It should be noted that in this, and in every other attempt to "typify" the park visitor, there are numerous exceptions and variations^.
The "Typical Hotel/Motel/Resort Guest"
• This typical overnight guest is in the parks for a vacation rather than for business reasons. Like all visitors to the parks, he is most likely to be a Canadian, and probably lives in Alberta.
• She, or more commonly he, will encounter American visitors in the hotel, motel or resort facility more often than might be expected given the overall number of Americans visiting the parks.
• The guest is comparatively unlikely to meet Japanese tourists at the hotel because they do not represent a
^All information in this section is derived from overnight person visitor measures. For proportions or numbers of visitors who meet each characteristic referred to in this section, please see Detailed Tabulations, Volume I, pages 42-1/42-4 and Volume II Detailed Tabulations.
Within the Detailed Tabulations, figures are available for other accommodation forms, including bed and breakfast establishments and youth hostels. The small sample sizes involved preclude detailed analysis of the profiles of these "guests" in this report.
■ -52- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
L L [
L
[ [
c c [ [
L
c
L
sizeable proportion of all parks visitors. At the same time, there is probably no better place within the park system to meet these overseas visitors, since almost all Japanese overnight visitors stay in hotels, motels and resorts during the park portion of their trip.
• This "typical guest" is at least 35 years of age. Like the visitor in general, he is also apt to be engaged in a professional, managerial or other white collar occupation and to have a reasonably high income^ .
• He is unlikely to be travelling alone, but is more commonly a member of a couple, or one of a group of friends visiting the park system^.
• Although he has been to the Rocky Mountain National Parks on previous occasions, the "typical guest" is an avid participant in park activities, including skiing, water sports, hiking, jogging or climbing, and shopping^ .
The "Typical Camper'
A "typical Rocky Mountain National Parks camper" is in the parks with family members to a greater extent than is the typical hotel guest^. These campers are also more likely to be males than females.
^These measures derive from the self -completion attitudinal questionnaire (See Detailed Tables, Volume II).
■ -53- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
[
L [
[ [ [ c [ [ [
[ [
[
L L [
L
• Generally speaking, the camper is somewhat younger than the hotel guest, but this form of shelter attracts men and women in all age categories.
• During a stroll through the campgrounds, the camper is quite likely to meet other Canadians who live in Alberta. At the same time, he or she is more likely to meet a resident of British Columbia or Saskatchewan in the campgrounds than is the hotel or motel guest who might be walking through the lobby of a commercial roofed accommodation facility.
• As a rule, the typical camper is less affluent than is the typical hotel/motel guest. Not only does the camper fall into a lower income category^ than does the hotel/motel guest, but he or she is also less likely to be working in a high status occupation.
• The camper is a particularly avid participant in activities such as hiking, jogging, and climbing; attending museums or historical sites; and in utilizing park information centres and interpretative programs^.
• While he or she may participate in these activities to a greater extent than overnight visitors who stay in roofed accommodation, the level of involvement in activities such as the Snocoach tour or other day- tours, water sports, and shopping does not vary appreciably between the "typical camper" and the "typical hotel/motel guest".
■^•These measures derive from the self -completion attitudinal questionnaire. See Detailed Tables, Volume II.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-54-
>chibit 30
Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks By AccoiniDodation Type
ctual
eighted/Projected, In Thousands
Any Park
An
Alberta park
(4,721) (4,372) (6,063.1) (5,523.2) % %
Banff
Jasper (1,564)
(2,808) (3,683.3) (1,839.9)
A British
Columbia
Park
(210)
(291.3)
%
ommercial Roofed Accommodation
Hotel/Motel/
Resort/Lodge Commercial Cottage/
Cabin Bed And Breakfast Youth Hostel
70
65
3 1 2
73
68
3 1 2
80
76
1 1
3
59
53
5 1 *
57
54 3
damping Facilities
Campsite/Trailer
Park Back Country
Camping
23
22 1
21
20 1
16
16 1
30
28 1
43
39 3
?riends/0%m Vacation Home
10
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-1, 44-9, 44-17, 44-25, 44-41)
^Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
24. a) Accommodation Utilization By Person Nights Spent In Specific Parks
Of the 6.1 million person nights spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks, 7-in-lO, or 4.2 million were spent in commercial roofed accommodation^.
• The majority of these visitor nights were spent in hotels, motels, resorts or lodges in the parks (4.0 million) .
• On an annual basis, camping nights (back country and campsite/trailer facilities) account for more than one out of every five nights spent in the parks system (23%, or 1.4 million person nights).
• One in every twenty nights over the year was spent in a traveller's own or a friend's vacation home within the parks' boundaries.
Roofed accommodation is the dominant form of shelter across all the parks, in part because weather conditions in seasons other than the summer preclude camping, except for the heartiest of visitors (see following section) . Nonetheless, Banff overnight visitors are more likely to spend their nights in a roofed setting (80% of all person nights spent in this park) than are overnight visitors to Jasper National Park (59% of all person nights spent in this park) .
•"•Includes hotel/motel/resort/lodge, commercial cottage/cabin, bed and breakfast facility and youth hostel.
B -55- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
L L L L L L [
[ [
[ [ [ [ [ [
[ L [
Conversely, utilization of camping facilities is more intensive in Jasper National Park (30% of all person nights spent in Jasper) than is evident for Banff (16% of all person nights spent in this park) . British Columbia parks Bore closely resemble Jasper National Park than Banff in the relative promi- nence of camping nights spent within their boundaries (43% of all person nights spent in these parks are spent in camping facilities) .
The variations discussed above are almost certainly affected by seasonal variations. Camping is extremely uncommon in winter and Banff attracts a higher proportion of its visitors, than do the other parks, during this season.
Ruston/Tomcmy & Associates Lkl.
-56-
hibit 31
:tual
ighted/Projected , :n Thousands
Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Parks By Acconunodation Type
In
Total (4,721) (6,063.1) %
In. . . Season^
(2,798) (2,835.2) %
(693) (521.7) %
Winter (639) (2,055.3) %
Spring (591) (651.0) %
Dnunercial Roofed Acconunodation
70
52
74
88
88
Hotel/Motel/Resort/
Lodge Cominercial Cottage/
Cabin Bed And Breakfast Youth Hostel
65
3 1 2
45
5 1 1
70 2 2
85 3
85
2 *
1
amping Facilities
Campsite/Trailer
Park Back Country
Camping
riends/0%m Vacation Home
ot Stated
23
22 1
39
39 1
26
21 4
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-5, 6)
See Foreword for definition of seasons. Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
24. b) Accommodation Utilization By Person Nights Sp>ent By Season
Among the four Rocky Mountain parks, just over l-in-2 person nights (1.5 million) are spent in commercial roofed accommodation during the summer months, while almost 4-in-lO are spent in the campsites, trailer sites, or back country camping facilities within the parks (1.1 million). Given the weather conditions in the Rocky Mountain National Parks, it is not particularly surprising that utilization of camping faci- lities declines markedly, and roofed accommodation usage increases significantly in all other seasons.
Roofed shelter is clearly preferred in both winter and spring — almost 9-in-lO of all person nights during these seasons are spent in commercial roofed accommodation. Alter- nately, fall seems to be the transition season. There is a significant increase in the proportion of fall person nights spent in commercial roofed accommodation (74%) vis-a-vis summer (52%) , but camper nights account for the remaining l-in-4 autumn nights.
Over the course of the year, hotel and motel rooms^ are, like the parks themselves, most likely to be filled by Canadian, and especially Albertan visitors. Of all utilized hotel/motel person nights, 6-in-lO are taken by Canadians (4-in-lO Albertans) . More than one-quarter of the hotel^ person nights derive from American tourists in the parks (28%) , whereas approximately one-eighth are filled by overseas travellers (13%) . These figures are almost identical to the proportion of total person nights accounted for by tourists from each key origin.
Includes hotel, motel, resort and lodge facilities.
■ -57- Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
[ [ [
[ [
L [ [ [ [ [ [ L.
[ [
L L [ [
Like roofed accommodation, utilization of camping facilities closely resembles the distribution of person nights as a whole within various origin groups. There is, however, one notable exception. Person nights spent by Japanese visitors to the parks are quite unlikely to be spent in campgrounds or in the back country.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-58-
xhibit 32
Seasonal^ Differences By Accommodation Type And Park
SumTTier
Winter Spring
Person Nights
Roc)cy Mountain National
Parks In Total (6,063.1)
Banff (3,683.3)
Jasper (1,839.9)
British Columbia Parks (291.3)
|
% |
47 |
9 |
34 |
11 |
|
% |
37 |
10 |
42 |
11 |
|
% |
59 |
6 |
23 |
12 |
|
% |
58 |
7 |
29 |
6 |
Person Nights Spent
[n Any Commercial Roofed
VnnnTTiTnrKjation
Rocky Mountain National
Parks In Total Banff Jasper
British Columbia Parks
(4,246.5)
(2,955.3) (1,079.3) (165.3)
|
% |
35 |
9 |
43 |
13 |
|
% |
29 |
9 |
49 |
13 |
|
% |
50 |
8 |
26 |
16 |
|
% |
38 |
6 |
51 |
6 |
Person Nights Spent In Knv Camping Facility
Ilocky Mountain National
Parks In Total (1,388.4)
Banff (599.7)
Jasper (545.0)
British Columbia Parks (123.8)
|
% |
81 |
10 |
6 |
4 |
|
% |
75 |
16 |
3 |
6 |
|
% |
81 |
6 |
10 |
3 |
|
% |
85 |
8 |
1 |
5 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-5, 13, 21, 43) ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
^All bases shown on this table are weighted/projected, in thousands See Detailed Tables for actual bases.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
25. Commercial Roofed Accommodation And Ceonping Nights In Specific Parks By Season
As is evident from the facing table, almost l-in-2 person nights spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks occur during the summer season, and a further one-third are spent during the winter^. The distributions of person nights in Banff and Jasper National Parks deviate significantly from this annual pattern.
# Specifically, fewer than 4-in-lO nights in Banff National Park, or 1.4 million person nights, are spent there during the summer season, whereas more than 4-in-lO, or 1.5 million person nights are spent in this park during the winter seasons. This finding is not altogether surprising, given the prominence of winter to overall visitation in Banff (see Section 5) .
• Jasper National Park, in turn, displays a very different seasonal pattern. In this park, the majority of person nights occur during the summer season (59% or 1.1 million person nights), but fewer than one-quarter of them take place during the long winter season (23% or 0.4 million person nights).
In terms of the proportions of total nights spent in various seasons, the two British Columbia parks closely resemble Jasper National Park. That is, summer accounts for about twice the proportion of nights as does winter.
^See Section 8 for a discussion of total person nights by park
■ -59- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
[
r
L
r
[ [
c c c c c [
L
L
L
[
[
c [
c
Of all person nights spent in commercial roofed accommo- dation^, more were spent during the winter (43%, or 1.8 million) than during the summer (35%, or 1.5 million). These proportions represent something of a reversal from the pattern evident for all person nights — a reversal that likely reflects the impact of campers on the distribution of person nights across the year.
Not surprisingly, camping nights are largely restricted to the summer season, regardless of park. Of all person nights spent camping in the Rocky Mountain National Parks between June 1987 and June 1988, more than 8-in-lO of them were spent during the summer season. Banff National Park is the only park to attract more than 1-in-lO of its camper nights to a season other than summer. In this park, almost l-in-6 camper nights occur in the fall. Jasper National Park, on the other hand, has special success in attracting winter camping. Of all person camping nights spent in this park over the year, 1-in-lO took place during the winter.
^Includes hotel/motel/resort/lodge, commercial cottage/cabin bed and breakfast facility and youth hostel.
Ruston/Tomcxny & Associates lid.
-60-
Exhibit 33
|
Incidence And Type Of Prepaid Expenditures |
|||||
|
ADong Person Visitors-^ |
To. . . |
||||
|
An |
A British |
||||
|
Any |
Alberta |
Columbia |
|||
|
Park |
Banff |
Jasoer |
Park |
||
|
Actual |
(2,351) |
(2,270) |
(1,738) |
(1.325) |
(538) |
|
Weigh ted/ Projected , |
|||||
|
In Thousands |
(4,084.0) |
(3,898.6) |
(3,167.5) |
(1,598.9) |
(748.3) |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
Any Prepaid |
13 |
14 |
15 |
18 |
21 |
|
Package (Only) |
6 |
6 |
7 |
10 |
11 |
|
Individual (Only) |
6 |
6 |
7 |
6 |
8 |
|
Both Package And |
|||||
|
Individual |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
Incidence And Type Of |
Prepaid Expenditures |
|||
|
Among Person |
Visitors-^ |
To Any Park In . . . |
||
|
Suminer ^ |
Fall |
Winter |
5pr;nq |
|
|
Actual |
(1,189) |
(378) |
(390) |
(394) |
|
Weighted/Projected, |
||||
|
In Thousands |
(1,646.1) |
(391.8) |
(1,441.5) |
(604.6) |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
Any Prepaid |
11 |
10 |
17 |
12 |
|
Package (Only) |
6 |
7 |
6 |
6 |
|
Individual (Only) |
4 |
3 |
10 |
5 |
|
Both Package And |
||||
|
Individual |
1 |
* |
1 |
2 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 46-1, 7)
^Spent time, money or went sightseeing in specific park.
^Spent time, money or vent sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks. ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
*Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
E.
EXPENDITURES IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
26. Prepaid And Direct Expenditures
Expenditure information in this report represents the sum of prepaid^ dollars eligible for allocation to the park system and "direct" dollars (items paid for directly by the visitor while in the park system) . All figures shown are in Canadian dollars^.
While the majority of visitors do not pay in advance for any of the services they use during their stay within the parks (87%) , approximately l-in-7 claim to have prepaid for some portion of the trip that brought them within the boundaries of the Rocky Mountain National Parks. These individuals are almost evenly divided between those who purchase a package (two or more of accommodation, transportation, food/beverages, entertainment, and auto rental) and those who prepay for one of these items on an individual basis.
^Such items include accommodation, food/beverage, and recreation costs for the number of nights the visitor spent within the parks. Auto rental, for vehicles picked up within the park boundaries are also included as legitimate revenues for the park. Excluded from all prepaid allocations to the park system are transportation costs that brought the visitor to the parks, and the per night cost of other prepaid items for nights covered by the package but not spent within the park boundaries. For details of prepaid allocation rules, please refer to the Technical Appendix. Section A (under separate cover) .
^Conversion of foreign currencies into Canadian dollars was conducted throughout the year-long survey. Exchange rates were monitored on a weekly basis, and the average rate for a calendar month for each foreign currency was applied to interviews conducted during that month.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-61-
c c [
[ [
c [
[
c c
[
L L
[ [ [
r [ [
Interestingly, both Jasper and the British Columbia parks are visited by a slightly higher proportion of individuals who prepaid for some of their expenses prior to entering the park system than is Banff National Park. Seasonal data also suggest that the "winter ski package" has a reasonably dramatic impact on expenditure patterns in this season. Almost 2*in-10 winter visitors to the parks claim to have prepaid for some portion of their expenses, compared to just over 1-in-lO in every other season.
While not unexpected, it is worth noting that charter visitors to the parks are very likely to be coincident with those individuals who have prepaid for some of their trip costs before leaving home. At the same time, more than 6-in-lO visitors with any prepaid expenses arrive in the Rocky Mountain National Parks in a private vehicle (63%) .
The majority of prepaid spenders are Canadians (57%), most of whom reside in Alberta (49%), but the United States also contributes a disproportionately high volume of prepaid visitors (14% of all visitors; 30% of all prepaid spenders). Addition- ally, Japanese visitors are over-represented within the prepaid sector. These individuals represent 1-in-lOO visitors to the parks, but constitute l-in-20 prepaid spenders.
Suston/Tomany & AssockilK lid.
-62-
I L
I
L L [
r"
L [ [ [ [ [ [ l [ [
27. Incidence And Proportion Of Expenditure By Category For The Rocky Mountain National Parks
The initial chapter of this report provides the total expenditures made by visitors to the four Rocky Mountain National Parks, by season and by expense category. In this chapter the following analyses are provided:
• an examination of the incidence of expenditure by category ;
• the proportion of total dollars spent in the parks accounted for by each category of expense; and
• average expenditures per category.
The reader is reminded of the high degree of volatility in expenditure estimates by expense category and for all sub- groups within an expense category. While the analysis presented herein respects the information provided by visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks, the following expenditure categories and any analysis of them, should be approached with extreme caution:
• Retail Expenditures in total and within sub-groups;
• Recreation/Pleasure Expenditures in total and within sub-groups ;
• Conference/Registration Fees in total and within sub- groups ;
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-63-
Exhibit 34
Total Parks Exi>enditures In Specific Categories
Incidence Proportion Of Of Total
Expenditure^ Expenditure
Actual (2,351) ($842,538)
Weighted/Projected,
In Thousands (1,625.5) ($417,227.4)
% %
Lodging 40 30
Restaurants 74 30
Retail 46 14
Recreation/Pleasure 40 10
Vehicle Gas/Oil/Repair 47 7
Groceries 38 4
Camping Fees 11 1
Park Entrance/
Licence Fees 56 2
Conference/Convention
Fees 3 1
Auto Rental Within
Parks 3 1
Transportation Within
Parks 5
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-1/5; 57-1/2)
^Among party visits (spent time, money or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
• Groceries Bought In Stores in total and within sub- groups ; and
• Park Entrance/Licence Fees in total and within sub- groups.
It should be noted that all expenditure information was collected on a "party visit" basis. Incidence figures provided in this section are based on the 1.6 million party visits in the Rocky Mountain National Parks over the year. To retain consis- tency with most other data in this report, average measures shown in the remaining sections of this chapter have been pro- vided on a "person visitor" or "person night" basis (party averages are available in the detailed tables) .
• Incidence of Party Expenditure
Three in every four parties that visit the Rocky Mountain National Parks spend money on food and/or beverages in restau- rants within the parks' boundaries, while more than l-in-2 acknowledge paying a park entrance or other licencing fee. Accommodation expenses are included by more than one-half of all visitor parties, more commonly in the form of "lodging" costs^ (40%) than camping fees (11%) .
Service stations within the parks benefit from almost l-in-2 visitor parties that purchase gas, oil or have repairs made. The same proportion of visitor parties make retail purchases while in the parks (46%) . Grocery stores are the beneficiaries of purchases by almost 4-in-lO visitor parties and a similar proportion purchase day tours, ski lift tickets or other recreational or pleasure items.
Includes all commercial roofed accommodation.
■ -64- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
[
L L L L [ [ [ L [ [
L [
L L [
L
[
Comparatively few parties pay for a rental car within the parks (3%), utilize internal transportation systems such as shuttle buses (5%) , or pay convention or conference registration fees (4%).
• Proportion of Total Expenditures
Roofed accommodation ($127 million) and restaurant meals ($123 million) account for six out of every ten dollars spent within the Rocky Mountain National Parks over the year. A further l-in-4 dollars are spent by park visitors on recreation or pleasure ($43 million) and souvenirs or other retail purchases ($60 million) .
Although almost l-in-2 visitor parties visit a service station for vehicle maintenance or repairs, the revenue generated is comparatively small ($27 million) over the year. Because the fees are modest, park entrance or other licence fees are also widely paid (56%) but contribute a minimal amount to the annual revenue in the parks (2%, or $7 million).
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-65-
Exhibit 35
Weighted/Projected In Thousands^
Proportion Of Expenditures In Specific Categories, By Park
Banff
British Columbia Parks
($286,522.3) ($112,919.2) ($13,400.0) % % %
Lodging
Restaurants
Retail
Recreation/Pleasure Vehicle Gas/Oil/Repair Groceries
Park Entrance/Licence Fees
Camping Fees
Conference/Convention Fees
Auto Rental Within Parks
Transportation Within Parks
31 30 15 11 5 4
2 1
29 28 14 10 9 6
2 1
1
1
27 29 10
6 15
6
4 4
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 48-1/2; 49-1/2; 51-1/2)
^See Detailed Tables for actual bases. *Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
28. a) Proportion Of Expenditures In Specific Categories Bv Park
On a proportional basis, the amount of money spent on individual expense categories in the parks shown on the facing table^ does not vary substantively. There are, however, indications that:
• vehicle expenses at service stations in Jasper (9% or $10 million) and the British Columbia parks (15% or $2 million) are relatively more important contributors to the total expenditures in these parks than is the case in Banff National Park (5% or $15 million) ;
• Banff and Jasper National Parks draw roughly the same proportion of total revenue from what might be con- sidered "purely discretionary spending" — retail and recreation/pleasure items. The British Columbia parks, on the other hand, are less likely to attract their revenues from these types of expenses; and
• camping fees appear to be a more important source of revenue for the British Columbia parks (4% or about $0.5 million) than they are for either Alberta park. This finding likely reflects the fact that the westerly parks support a disproportionately high number of camper nights relative to the Alberta parks (see Section 24. a).
•'•Expenditures were allocated to specific parks according to pre- established rules (see Technical Appendix. Section A) . The rules permitted allocations to three geographical areas: Banff National Park, Jasper National Park, and Yoho and Kootenay National Parks as a combined unit. Consequently, these three units are utilized in this analysis.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-66-
chibit 36
Proportion Of Total Rocky Mountain National Parks Expenditures In Specific Categories By Season^
Suminer Fall Winter Spring
|
sighted/Pro j ected , In Thousands^ ($161, |
567.2) % |
($41,334.7) % |
($151,192.4) % |
($63,133 % |
|
odqinq |
29 |
31 |
32 |
31 |
|
estaurants |
26 |
28 |
34 |
31 |
|
etail |
15 |
19 |
11 |
18 |
|
ecreat ion/Pleasure |
10 |
4 |
14 |
5 |
|
ehicle Gas/Oil/ Repair |
9 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
|
roceries |
5 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
|
lamping Fees |
3 |
1 |
★ |
1 |
|
>ark Entrance/ Licence Fees |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
lonference/Convention Fees |
* |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
LUto Rental Within Parks |
1 |
1 |
* |
1 |
|
transportation Within Parks |
* |
1 |
* |
1 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 47-5/6)
;See Foreword for definition of seasons. •See Detailed Tables for actual bases.
'Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
28. b) Proportion Of Expenditures In Specific Categories By Season
Park visitors exhibit remarkably similar spending pat- terns across the four seasons of the year. The comparatively few differences in the proportions of total revenue per season spent on specific categories include the following:
• Food and beverage expenditures in restaurants within the Rocky Mountain National Parks constitute a greater proportion of winter expenditure than is the case in any other season. This finding may reflect the fact that meals which can be enjoyed in the outdoors during other seasons — by both campers and picnickers — are eaten in restaurants during the cold winter months. This hypothesis is supported by the decline in the relative importance of food and beverages purchased in the parks' grocery stores during the winter;
• Retail expenses appear to be more important while recreation/pleasure expenses are less important to total revenue in both shoulder seasons than is evident for the two peak seasons. The proportional decline in recreational expenditures likely reflects the fact that summer recreational opportunities and winter skiing opportunities are not available to the shoulder traveller. The corresponding increase in retail rev- enues during the fall in particular may reflect the profile of the fall visitor. As discussed previously, this visitor is apt to be retired, with a particularly high disposable income (see Section 15. b).
Ruston/Tomany & Associates LW.
-67-
Exhibit 37
Average Expenditures For Four Rocky Mountain National Parks^
Total Person Total Visitors With
Person Specific Visitor? fl)^ Expenses fll)3
All Expenses
$102
$106
Lodging $ 31
Restaurants $ 30
Retail $ 15
Recreation/Pleasure $ 10
Vehicle Gas/Oil/
Repair $ 7
Groceries $ 4
Camping Fees $ 1
Park Entrance/
Licence Fees $ 2
Conference/
Convention Fees $ 1
Auto Rental
Within Parks *
Transportation
Within Parks *
$ 78 $ 41 $ 31 $ 25
$ 14 $ 12 $ 10
$ 3
$ 28
$ 16
$ 7
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-1/5)
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. ^Average I « Average calculated on total person
visitors to parks. ^Average II ■ Average calculated on person visitors
who spent money on the specific expenditure
category.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
29. Average Expenditures, By Category, For The Rocky Mountain National Parks — An Overview
This, and the subsequent sections in this chapter, provide information on the average expenditure made by park visitors^. These averages can be presented in several ways. The two provided in this report are described below:
• Average I is calculated on all person units (visitors, nights, etc.)# regardless of whether the individual reported any expenditure for the specific expenditure category.
For example, Average I lodging costs per visitor provides the average amount spent by every man, woman and child who visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks, even if they were same-day or camper visitors (i.e., the total lodging expenditures for all visitors to the parks divided by the total number of visitors) .
• Average II is calculated only on those individuals who reported or were assigned expenditures for the specific expenditure category.
This figure provides the average amount spent for lodging, for example, among visitors who incurred lodging expenses within the parks (i.e., the total lodging expenditures for all visitors to the parks divided by the number of visitors who spent money on lodging) .
Both types of averages are utilized in this analysis, since each contributes to an understanding of current and future revenue potential for the parks. For example, it could be important to know the average amount spent on roofed accommodation by those who utilized such accommodation. It may also be useful to know
•••On a "person" basis. Averages for the "party unit" are available in the Detailed Tables, Volume I.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-68-
L
L
L [
L
[ [ [ [ C [ [ [ [ [ [
that the parks obtain a particular dollar amount in retail spending for every individual who visits the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
• Average I — Total Parks Visitors
Each of the 4.1 million people who visited the Rocky Mountain National Parks spends, on average, more than $100 in the parks system^. Visitors entering the parks by modes other than private vehicles, and those who live outside Canada spend more money, on average, during their park stay than do private vehicle, and Canadian visitors^.
Exhibit 38
All Visitors $102
Charter Visitors $341
Bus/Train Visitors $340
Private Vehicle Visitors $ 83
American Visitors $194
Overseas Visitors^ $258
Japanese Visitors $350
Canadian Visitors $ 76
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 52-7)
These findings are not surprising given that visitors entering by charter motorcoach, scheduled bus and train service, and those coming from the United States and overseas are almost
^Expenditure data were collected for the travel or vehicle party, as a unit. To obtain expenditures per person, the total party expenditure was divided by the total number of individuals in the party.
^Small sample sizes in the following sub-groups require that the average expenditure figures shown be interpreted with extreme caution: scheduled bus/train visitors, overseas and Japanese visitors.
•^Includes Japanese visitors.
Rusion/Tomany & Associates lid.
-69-
L L L
L
^1 —
[ L
[
L [
r r
L
L
r r
exclusively overnight visitors. As such, their park stay is longer than the private vehicle visitor or Canadian (commonly a same-day visitor) and as a result, they almost inevitably incur lodging expenses — a key contributor to overall spending in the parks.
When total expenditures are broken down into components, it is clear that roofed accommodation ($31) and restaurant meals and beverages ($30) are the highest per capita expenses for a park visitor. Souvenirs and other retail items, followed by recreational expenses also constitute significant cost items for the visitor, and significant revenues for merchants. Retail establishments collect approximately $15, and recreational facilities receive revenues of about $10 for each man, woman, and child who visits the Rocky Mountain National Parks over the year.
Service stations within the parks benefit from tourism in the parks at the rate of seven dollars per capita, while grocery stores collect receipts in the neighbourhood of four dollars per park visitor over the year. Via entrance, licence and camping fees, the Canadian Parks Service receives an average of about three dollars for every individual who visits the park system, whereas conference or convention fees, auto rental establish- ments within the parks, and internal transportation services generate one dollar or less per visitor^.
• Average II — Total With Expenditures In Specific Categories
Not surprisingly, averages for all expenditure categories are higher when based only on those visitors who incurred the expense (Average II) than they are when based on the entire
Interpret with caution.
-70'
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
t
c
[ [
L [
I
u
L [
[ [ L L L
visitor population (Average I) . Thus, during the entire stay within the Rocky Mountain National Parks, each individual who spends money on roofed accommodation increases the parks' revenue by an average of $78 (see subsequent sections of this chapter for averages based on person nights) . In this "user" context, restaurants benefit at the rate of about $40 per person visit to the park system, while merchants and vendors obtain about $3 0 from each visitor during his or her stay in the parks. Providers of recreational services sell an average of $25 worth of their products to each buyer.
Each service station user leaves almost $15 in the parks' stations during the visit, whereas grocery store users spend somewhat less at the cash register ($12) . Each camper within the parks contributes $10 in camping fees, while those who report paying park entrance or other licence fees pay substantially less ($3) .
Although the "user" cost on a per capita basis is relatively high, caution should be exercised in interpreting figures for conference/convention fees ($28) , auto rental within the parks ($16) , and internal transportation costs ($7) because the number of "spenders" in each of these categories is rela- tively small.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-71-
Exhibit 39
All Expenses
Lodging
Restaurants
Retail
Recreation
Vehicle/Gas/Oil
Groceries
Camping Fees
Park Entrance/Licence
Conference/ Convention
Auto Rental In Parks
Transportation In Parks
Average Expenditures Per Night/Sane -Day Visit For Four Rocky Mountain National Parks ^
Per Person Night/ Day Trip For Those Total Per Person With Specific Wiahts/Dav Trios (1)^ Expanses [JJ)^
Per
$
$66
$22 $19 $ 9 $ 6 $ 3 $ 3 $ 1 $ 1
$ 1
Per Day Trip
$19
N/A $ 6 $ 3 $ 3 $ 4 $ 1 N/A $ 1
Per Night $
$67
$30 $23 $13 $10 $ 6 $ 5 $ 4 $ 1
$ 8 $ 4
$ 2
Per Day Trip
$20
N/A $10 $13 $12 $11 $ 5 N/A $ 2
$29
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 95-1/e; 101-1/6)
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. ^Average I « Average calculated on total person visitors to parks.
•»Average II « Average calculated on person visitors who spent money on the specific expenditure category.
*Less than $0.50.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
30. Average Expenditures Per Night And Per Sane-Day Visit, By Category. For The Rockv Mountain National Parks
The facing table provides the average per person per night expenditure and the average per same-day person visit expenditure for each category (Average I — total, and Average II spenders within the category) .
Each night spent in the park system by each visitor generates more than $65 in revenue for the parks. The same-day visitor spends less than one-third this amount, or about $20 per person visit. To put these averages in context, the reader might recall that the Rocky Mountain National Parks hosts approximately 1.8 million same-day person visitors, and more than 6 million person nights over the year. In effect, there- fore, overnight visitors account for nore than ninety percent of visitor expenditure in the parks.
In the following analysis, averages based on category users (Average II) are examined. Subsequently, comments are offered about total overnight and same-day average expenditures (Average I) .
• Per Night Costs Among Category Users (Average II)
Lodging in commercial roofed accommodation costs the overnight traveller about $30 per night (per person). In the course of a 24-hour day, he or she spends a further $23 on food in restaurants, more than ten dollars ($13) on retail purchases, and slightly less ($10) on recreation or entertainment. Keeping the vehicle in good working order requires an additional six dollars among those who use service stations within the parks.
■ -'2
Buston/lbmony If Assockrtes Ltd.
L [ L [ [ [ [ [
L [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ L
c
The camper enjoys considerably smaller accommodation costs than does the overnight person visitor who uses roofed facilities. On a per night basis, the camper expends less than five dollars in camping fees.
• Per Same-Day Trip Costs Among Category Users (Average II)
Every same-day person visitor who utilizes restaurants in the Rocky Mountain National Parks spends about ten dollars during the course of the day. This constitutes about one-half the corresponding cost for overnight visitors. The differences between these costs may derive from the fact that the same-day traveller consumes one or two meals within the parks whereas the overnight visitor is more likely to consume three.
Conversely, the same-day person visitor who uses a service station within the parks spends almost twice as much ($11), on average, as does the overnighter ($6)^.
The receipt at the grocery store's cash register is the same for the same-day person visitor as it is for each daily visit made by an overnight person visitor ($5) . Average expenditures for other categories for same-day person visitors should be viewed with extreme caution given the small base sizes used in the calculations.
^The overnighter 's average is calculated on a per night basis. It is quite unlikely that he or she would utilize service stations once during each day spent in the parks. Given that the average number of nights spent in the parks by overnighters is between two and three, the overnight figure likely represents one stop at a service station during the park stay. As such, it is quite similar to the same-day visitors' cost.
■ -73- Ruston/Tomcmy & Associates Ltd.
L [ [ [
f—
L L [ [
L [ [ [ [
I
L
[
L L [ [
• Per Night/Same-Day Costs Among All Visitors (Average I)
The hospitality industry within the parks clearly benefits from the presence of overnight visitors. Not only does each individual who spends a night within the park boundaries pay more than $20 nightly for roofed accommodation, but he or she is also likely to spend appreciably more in the parks* restaurants ($19) , shops ($9) and entertainment/recreation facilities ($6) each day (night) than is the same-day visitor.
Ruston/Tomcmy & Associates Ltd.
-74-
Exhibit 40
Weighted/Projected In Thousands^
Average^ Total Expenditures, By Park
Banff
National
Park
Jasper
National
Park
British Columbia National Parks
($286,522.3) ($112,919.2) ($13,4 00.0) $ $ $
Total Park Stay (All Visitors)
$91
$71
$18
Per Person Per Night (All Person Nights)
$74
$58
$42
Per Same-Day Visitor (All Same-Day Visitors)
$19
$16
$ 7
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 53-1, 54-1, 56-1, 96-1, 97-1, 99-1, 101-1, 102-1)
^Average I = Average based on total .
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures allocated to specific parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
31. a) Total Average Expenditure Bv Park
Each individual who spends time, money or goes sight- seeing within Banff National Park contributes over $90 to this park. The corresponding figure for Jasper National Park is considerably lower, at about $70 per visitor. The high pro- portion of "secondary visitors"^ in the British Columbia parks likely contributes to the relatively low average dollar cost per visitor in these parks ($18) .
Each person night spent in Banff National Park contri- butes $74 toward the $287 million generated by this park over the year. In Jasper, a person night contributes almost $60 toward the $113 million in total annual revenue, while in the British Columbia parks, the equivalent figure is $42.
Same-day person visitors make considerably smaller per- day contributions to the overall revenue for individual parks. In Banff, these visitors leave an average of $20 within the park at the end of a day visit. The figure is slightly lower for Jasper ($16) , and considerably lower within the two British Columbia parks ($7) .
•"•The allocation rules for assigning dollars to specific parks require that dollars be allocated on the basis of nights spent. A same-day visitor to a British Columbia park who spends nights in either Banff or Jasper National Park will have all his/her expenditures allocated to the appropriate Alberta park (on a per night basis) . A high proportion of British Columbia parks visitors spend no nights in these parks, but do spend nights in an Alberta park. The rules require that no funds be allocated to Yoho or Kootenay for these same-day visitors.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-75-
Ixhibit 41
Weighted/ Projected , In Thousands^
Average^ Total Expenditures, By Season^
Summer Fall Winter
Spring
($161,567.2) ($41,334.7) ($151,192.4) ($63,133.1) $ $ $ $
?otal Park Stay (All Visitors)
$98
$105
$106
$104
Per Person Per Kight (All Person Nights)
$53
$ 72
$ 77
$ 85
Per Same-Day Visitor (All Same-Day Visitors)
$17
$ 22
$ 18
$ 22
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-13; 95-14; 100-1)
^Average I - Average based on total. ^See Foreword for definition of seasons. ■'See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases total expenditures for each season.
Figures shown are
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
31. b) Total Average Expenditure Bv Season
Although it has the highest level of visitation, and makes the most sizeable contribution to the overall value of tourism within the Rocky Mountain National Parks ($162 million) , the suminer season generates lower average expenditures per visitor and per visitor night than does any other season.
On average, each summer visitor provides the Rocky Mountain National Parks with just under $100 in revenue. This visitor, were he or she to come to the parks during the winter, would leave slightly more ($106) . On a per person per night basis, the differences between these two peak seasons become even more pronounced. Despite the decrease in room rates during seasons other than the summer, the winter overnight person visi- tor spends an average of $77 per night in the parks while the corresponding summer visitor spends only $53.
This finding is undoubtedly related to the influence of campers during the summer. Since roofed lodging and restaurant meals contribute so heavily to a visitor's total expenditures, any reduction in these costs is bound to have a lowering effect on the averages. The impact of campers is absent from the average same-day costs, and as is evident from the facing table, these figures remain relatively stable over the four seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-76-
Exhibit 42
Average^ Total Expenditures, By Place Of Residence
Canada U» S . A. Japan
Weighted/ Projected In Thousands^ ($246,834.6) ($111,365.2) ($17,977.0)
Total Park Stay (All Visitors) $76 $194 $350
Per Person Per Night (All Person Nights) $64 $ 69 $121
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-7, 95-7) ^Average I = Average based on total.
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures for each origin group.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
31. c) Total Average Expenditure Bv Place Of Residence
When average expenditures are examined by the place of origin of the visitor, it is clear that domestic tourists spend considerably less per person than do those who come from the United States or Japan. The disparity between the $76 average cost per Canadian visitor to the Rocky Mountain National Parks and the $194 figure for Americans is explained, in part, by the preponderance of same-day visitors among the domestic portion of the market. The Canadians who do spend nights within the park system are not dissimilar from their American counterparts — each of these tourists spends between $60 and $70 per night in the parks.
The sizeable spread between the average overnight cost per North American tourist and the cost per Japanese tourist ($121) does not reflect major differences in key expenditure items such as lodging or restaurant meals. Instead, it reflects the very substantial retail purchases made by Japanese visitors, perhaps due to the Japanese tradition of omivage (bringing home souvenirs and gifts to a large group of friends and relatives) . The Canadian overnight tourist will spend about $7 per person per night on retail merchandise. At another cash register, an American will be paying about $10, while the Japanese tourist is spending almost $65 (per person per night) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-77-
Exhibit 43
Average E3Ci>enditures For Lodging And Restaurant Pood And Beverages, By Park
British
Banff Jasper Columbia National National National Fj^rK PflrH E^iM
Weighted/Projected In Thousands^ ($286,522.3) ($112,919.2) ($13,400.0)
|
$ |
$ |
$ |
|
|
Average I |
|||
|
fBased On Totals |
|||
|
lodging |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$28 |
$21 |
$ 5 |
|
Per Night |
$25 |
$18 |
$13 |
|
Food And Beverages |
|||
|
Purchased In Restaurants |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$28 |
$20 |
$ 5 |
|
Per Night |
$22 |
$16 |
$12 |
|
Per Same Day Trip |
$ 6 |
$ 4 |
$ 2 |
|
Average II (Based On Visitors With SDecific Exoenditure^ |
|||
|
Ix>dginq |
|||
|
Per Visitor Per Night |
$70 $32 |
$57 $27 |
$33 $21 |
|
Food And Beverages Purchased In Restaurants |
|||
|
Per Visitor Per Night Per Same-Day Trip |
$38 $25 $11 |
$31 $21 $ 7 |
$22 $16 $12 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 53-1/2; 54-1/2, 56-1/2; 96-1/2; 97-1/2; 99-1/2; 101-2; 102-2; 104-2)
See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures allocated to each park.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
32. a) Average Expenditures For Lodging And Restaurants By Park
In this and the subsequent three sections, the most prominent expenditure categories are examined within park and season. These categories include lodging, restaurant food and beverages, retail expenses, and recreational costs. Averages provided are based on total (Average I) and on "spenders" within the specific category (Average II) . For lodging and restaurant food and beverages. Average II is the more salient, and there- fore the subject of analysis.
The Banff National Park visitor spends more money, per capita and per person night, on lodging and in restaurants than does his or her counterpart in Jasper National Park. In turn, the average expenditures for these items are higher among Jasper visitors than they are for person visitors and visitor nights in the British Columbia parks.
The per person per night cost for roofed accommodation in Banff National Park is just over $30, and each overnight visitor to this park spends an average of $70 on shelter during his or her stay. These figures are consistent with the average length of stay in Banff. On average, the visitor to this park spends between two and three nights.
Hotels and other roofed accommodation establishments in Jasper National Park generate just under $60 from every visitor who pays for shelter in this park. This "per visit" average converts to less than $30 per person per night. In the British Columbia parks, on the other hand, a visitor will leave slightly more than $30 in the parks' accommodation sector, and will spend about $20 per person per night to be housed in Yoho or Kootenay.
■ -78-
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
[
L
r L
L [ [ [ [
L L [ [
L L L L [ [ L
The disparities between Banff and Jasper National Parks are not as great with respect to restaurant costs as they are for accommodation. In fact, on a person night basis, the Banff overnighter spends an average of $25 on meals per day — a figure almost on par with the Jasper overnighter ($21) .
Same-day person visitors (who purchase food or beverages in restaurants) in Banff spend just over $10 on restaurant meals during the course of the day. This figure is somewhat higher than that evident for the corresponding Jasper visitor, and about the same as the same-day person visitor to a British Columbia park.
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-79-
Exhibit 44
Weighted/Projected In Thousands^
Average Expenditures Por Retail And Recreation/ Plea sure. By Park
Banff National
Jasper
National
Park
British
Columbia
National
($286,522.3) ($112,919.2) ($13,400.0)
|
$ |
$ |
$ |
|
|
Average I |
|||
|
fBased On Total) |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$13 |
$10 |
$ 2 |
|
Per Night |
$11 |
$ 8 |
$ 5 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$ 3 |
$ 3 |
* |
|
Pecr?atipn/Pl?asure |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$ 9 |
$ 7 |
$ 1 |
|
Per Night |
$ 7 |
$ 6 |
$ 2 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$ 4 |
$ 2 |
* |
|
Average II |
|||
|
(Based On Visitors With |
|||
|
Specific gxpendjtur?) |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$27 |
$22 |
$14 |
|
Per Night |
$14 |
$12 |
$11 |
|
Per Sane-Day Trip |
$11 |
$11 |
$ 5 |
|
Recreation/Pleasure |
|||
|
Per Visitor |
$22 |
$20 |
$ 6 |
|
Per Night |
$11 |
$11 |
$ 4 |
|
Per Sane-Day Trip |
$12 |
$ 9 |
$ 4 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volune I, pages 53-1/6; 54-1/6, 56-1/6; 96-1/6; 97-1/6; 99-1/6; 101-1/6, 102-1/6; 104-1/6)
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures allocated to each park.
*Less than $0.50,
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
32. b) Average Expenditures For Retail And Recreational Expenses. Bv Park ,
Every visitor in Banff National Park buys more than $10 worth of retail merchandise over the course of his or her stay in this park (Average I) . The data on the facing table clearly suggest that retail expenditure is higher, on average, for the overnight visitor (per night — $11) than it is for the person who enters and leaves the park on the same day ($3) . Recreation or pleasure related expenses are also higher among overnighters ($7 per person per night) than among same-day visitors ($4) .
The situation in Jasper National Park closely parallels that in Banff, although the average amount a visitor spends on retail purchases would appear to be slightly lower in the more northern park. Compared to Banff and Jasper National Parks, the British Columbia parks generate minimal retail and recreation revenue on a per capita visitor basis.
When average expenditures for retail and recreation are examined among visitors who claimed to incur these costs (Average II) , the findings indicate that the costs per person and per person night are quite similar between the two Alberta parks. Again, the revenue generated by Yoho and Kootenay parks on a per capita or per night basis among spenders in the respective categories is noticeably lower for both retail and recreational expenses than is the case in the Alberta parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-80-
Exhibit 45
Average Expenditures For Lodging And Restaurant Food And Beverages, By Season^
guFjner Zfiii yint?r Spring
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands^ ($161,567.2) ($41,334.7) ($151,192.4) ($63,133.1)
|
$ |
$ |
$ |
$ |
|
|
Average I |
||||
|
(&9P?d Pn TPt^l) |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$28 |
$32 |
$33 |
$33 |
|
Per Night |
$17 |
$24 |
$26 |
$29 |
|
Food And Beverages |
||||
|
Purchased In Restaurants |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$25 |
$29 |
$35 |
$32 |
|
Per Night |
$13 |
$19 |
$26 |
$25 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$ 5 |
$ 8 |
$ 5 |
$ 8 |
|
Average II |
||||
|
(Based On Visitors |
||||
|
With Specific |
||||
|
Expenditures ^ |
||||
|
Lodaina |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$90 |
$80 |
$64 |
$94 |
|
Per Night |
$29 |
$32 |
$30 |
$34 |
|
Food And Beverages |
||||
|
Purchased In Restaurants |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$38 |
$39 |
$42 |
$48 |
|
Per Night |
$19 |
$22 |
$28 |
$28 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$10 |
$13 |
$ 8 |
$16 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-13/18; 95-14/20; 100-1/6)
^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
^See Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures for each season.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
3 3. a) Average Expenditures For Lodging And Restaurants By Season
Generally speaking, the summer visitor generates slightly less revenue per capita for the parks' accommodation and res- taurant establishments than does his or her counterpart in any other season. When based on all visitors or all person nights spent in the respective seasons (Average I) , the impact of camping on lodging and restaurant spending seems to be in evi- dence. Each person visitor in the parks during the summer signifies almost $30 in revenue for roofed accommodation es- tablishments, and $25 for restaurants. In the winter, the per capita rate is marginally higher for lodging ($33) , but ap- preciably higher for restaurant meals ($35) . Same-day visitors spend an average of between five and eight dollars on restau- rant meals, regardless of season.
When assessed on a per person per night basis among those visitors who claimed to have the respective expenses, the amount of revenue generated for food and lodging is also essentially the same across the seasons. At the same time, when lodging averages are calculated on all overnight person visitors, the winter overnighter 's stay in the parks costs noticeably less ($64) than is the case in the summer ($90), likely because the visit is a somewhat longer one in the warmer months (see Section 22. b) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-81-
Exhibit 46
Average ExpenditureB For Retail And Recreation/ Pleasure
SiUmnSX Fall winter Spring
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands^ ($161,567.2) ($41,334.7) ($151,192.4) ($63,133.1)
|
$ |
$ |
$ |
$ |
|
|
Average I |
||||
|
P^t^ajl |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$15 |
$20 |
$11 |
$18 |
|
Per Night |
$ 8 |
$13 |
$ 8 |
$15 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
S 3 |
$ 6 |
$ 2 |
$ 5 |
|
Recreation/Pleasure |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$10 |
$ 4 |
$15 |
$ 5 |
|
Per Night |
$ 5 |
$ 3 |
$10 |
$ 4 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$ 2 |
$ 1 |
$ 7 |
$ 2 |
|
Average II |
||||
|
(Based On Visitors |
||||
|
With Specific |
||||
|
Exoenditures^ |
||||
|
Retail |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$30 |
$35 |
$25 |
$45 |
|
Per Night |
$11 |
$17 |
$13 |
$20 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$11 |
$16 |
$ 8 |
$21 |
|
Recreation/Pleasure |
||||
|
Per Visitor |
$23 |
$13 |
$36 |
$12 |
|
Per Night |
$ 8 |
$ 6 |
$17 |
$ 6 |
|
Per Same-Day Trip |
$ 8 |
$ 4 |
$22 |
$ 5 |
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 52-13/18; 95-14/20; 100-1/6)
^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
2see Detailed Tables for actual and weighted bases. Figures shown are total expenditures for each season.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
33. b) Average Expenditures For Retail And Recreational Expenses By Season .
Retail and recreational/entertainment revenue would appear to experience measurable variation across the seasons^. Average retail expenditures peak in the two shoulder seasons, whereas average recreation expenses are at their highest during the summer and winter.
The fact that every visitor to the parks spends about $20 on merchandise during the fall and spring, but spends less than this amount in the summer and particularly the winter, may ref- lect the over-representation of overseas tourists during the shoulder seasons. These individuals spend more per capita retail dollars than do their domestic counterparts. Conversely, the overseas visitor spends less money, on average, on recre- ational items than do Canadians. This finding, and the greater variety of recreational opportunities in the summer and espe- cially in the winter (skiing) , explain the higher per capita expenditures on recreation in the summer ($10) and winter ($15) , compared to the fall ($4) and spring ($5) .
-^Caution should be exercised in interpreting expenditure patterns for these categories because of the volatility of the estimates.
-82-
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
Exhibit 47
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Main Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip A»ong Roc)cy Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ To...
Any
(2,351) (4,084.0) %
An
Alberta £&IJS
(2,270) (3,898.6) %
(1,738) (3,167.5) %
(1.325) (1,598.9) %
A
British Columbia 2^
(538) (748.3) %
Pleasure
Vacation^ Recreational
Day Use^ Visit Vacation
Home
76
76
76
77
90
59 16 1
58 17 1
58 17 1
67 9 1
81 7 1
Business
Attend Special
Meeting/Conference Other Business
Personal
Family Affairs Errands/Shopping/ Ban)cing, Etc.
10
10
1
11
10
1
10
10
10
1
Just Passing Through Not Stated
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volxine I, pages 25-1/2)
Jspent time, aoney, or went sightseeing in specific park.
*A11 charter aotorcoach visitors are included in "vacation" main purpose
(the main purpose question was not included in the charter questionnaire). ^If "recreational day use" was respondent's stated nain purpose and nights
were spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks, »ain purpose of the parks
portion of the trip is considered to be "vacation" rather than
"recreational day use".
*Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
F. OTHER TOPICS RELATED TO THE VISITOR EXPERIENCE IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARKS
34. a) Main Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip Bv Parks Visited
All visitors to the Rocky Mountain National Parks were asked to describe the main purpose of the trip that brought them to the park system^. Most visitors declare "pleasure" to be the main purpose of their trip to the parks (76%) , with almost 6-in-lO describing the trip as a "vacation". A further l-in-6 (16%) claim that they are making day-use of the parks, while only 1-in-lOO are visiting a vacation home. The main purpose of the parks' portion of the trip is quite consistent with infor- mation provided on trip classification — those who describe their entire trip as an outdoor vacation (15%) , a resort vacation (16%) , or a touring vacation (27%) constitute the majority of parks visitors^.
A park visit motivated by business is more apt to relate to family business ("family affairs" — 10%) than to meetings or
■*-If an individual's main destination was the Rocky Mountain National Parks, it was assumed that the main purpose of the "entire trip" was equivalent to the main purpose of the parks' portion of the trip. If the parks were not the main desti- nation, a separate question was asked pertaining to the main purpose of the parks' portion of the trip. All charter visitors were assumed to have a "vacation" main purpose (the main purpose question was not included on the charter ques- tionnaires) . Because visitors' definitions of "recreational day use" do not necessarily correspond to the intention of the question, an edit was performed to ensure that "recreational day use" is associated only with same-day visitors to the parks' system.
^These data derive from the self -completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II, page 62-3). See questionnaire appended for definitions of the various trip classifications .
■ -83- Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
r
L
[ L [ [ [ [ [
L L [
[
L
[ [ [ [ [ [
conferences (5%) . At the same time, trips into the park system are quite unlikely to be motivated by "other business" or other personal reasons.
Despite the fact that more than l-in-20 visitors claim that their main purpose in visiting the Rocky Mountain National Parks is "just passing through (7%) , these individuals did stop to spend time or money, or to sightsee as they were passing through the parks.
Although Banff National Park visitors are as likely to be pleasure travellers as are those who visit Jasper, more Banff visitors describe their trip purpose as "recreational day use" (17%) than is the case among Jasper visitors (9%) .
The British Columbia park visitor is especially apt to depict his or her visit to the parks system as a vacation (81%) . Correspondingly, the visitor in these parks is less inclined to categorize the trip as one motivated by business or personal matters than is the Banff or Jasper visitor.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-84-
Exhibit 48
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Kain Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip A«ong Rocky Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ To Any Park. . .
In
(2,351) (4,084.0) %
(1,189) (1,646.1) %
(378) (391.8) %
(390) (1,441.5) %
(394 ) (604 .6) %
Pleasure
Vacation-' Recreational Day
Use^ Visit Vacation
Home
76
83
74
59 16 1
74
55 19 1
66
45
21
54 27 1
Business
Attend Special Meeting/ Conference
Other Business
11
11 1
Personal
Family Affairs Errands/Shopping/ Banking, Etc.
10
10
1
14
13 1
Just Passing Through 7 Not Stated 2
12 1
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 25-5/6)
^Spent tine, noney, or went sightseeing in at least one of the
Rocky Mountain National Parks. 'See Foreword for definition of seasons.
^All charter notorcoach visitors are included in "vacation" main purpose (the nain purpose question was not included in the charter questionnaire) .
*If "recreational day use" was respondent's stated main purpose and nights were spent in the Rocky Mountain National Parks, main purpose of the parks portion of the trip is considered to be "vacation" rather than "recreational day use".
*Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
]
34. b) Main Purpose Of Parks Portion Of Trip Bv Season
Summer and spring visitors are most likely to be taking a pleasure trip. At the same time, recreational day use as a motivation for visiting the Rocky Mountain National Parks is lowest in the summer months (as a proportion of all visitors) . During this peak season, fewer than 1-in-lO visitors claim this day use as their purpose for entering the park system. This compares with at least 2-in-lO in every other season.
Interestingly, winter is the season least likely to entice "vacation" or "pleasure" visitors. In this season, more than 1-in-lO national park visitors indicate that they are in the parks for the purpose of attending to family affairs (13%) . Winter also attracts a significantly higher number of visitors who are in the parks for the purpose of "just passing through" than is the case in any other season (12%) .
Conferences or business meetings lure a higher proportion of fall visitors to the park system than they do at any other time of year. During this season, more than 1-in-lO visitors name these business reasons as their main purpose, compared to l-in-33 during the summer, and about l-in-14 during the winter. These data are quite consistent with the trip classification information provided by visitors who completed the attitudinal questionnaire. Over the full year, approximately l-in-20 Rocky Mountain National Parks visitors (6%) depict theirs as a business trip, while more than twice this proportion (15%) of fall visitors use this trip classification^.
^These data derive from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II, page 62-3). See questionnaire appended for definitions of the various trip classifications.
r
Rusion/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-85-
Exhibit 49
Volunteered Featxires That Attracted/ Influenced Vieitors To Banff /Jasper national Parks A»ong Person Visitors^ To...
An
Alberta
Park Banrr JPgper
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
(2,270)
(1.738)
(1,325)
(3,898.6) %
(3,167.5) %
(1,598.9) %
Any Reference To;
General Beauty/Scenery 22 23 28
The Parks/Roc)cy Mountains 22 23 26
Enroute To Another Location/Part Of Tour 18 15 24
Kature/Forests/Lakes/ Wildlife 10 10 13
To See Animals/Wildlife 5 4 8
The Lakes 2 2 4
Nature 3 3 2
Skiing 10 9 6
Specific Natural Attractions 8 8 6
Hot Springs 5 6 3
Lake Louise 2 2*
The Icefields 112
Publicity 8 9 12
Get Away Fro* City/People 7 8 5
Visit/Meet Friends/ Relatives 6 5 7
Past Experience/Been Here Before 7 8 7
Beard About It From Relatives/Friends 6 7 10
Biking 4 4 2
Fishing 2 3 *
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 63>l/6)
^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park. *Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Toniany & Associates Ud.
3 5. a) Volunteered Features That Attract Visitors To Banff Or Jasper National Park By Parks Visited
When asked to describe, in their own words ""what at- tracted or influenced your decision to travel to the Banff/ Jasper National Parks system on this trip", most visitors res- pond with references to the parks* beauty and terrain. They specifically refer to the mountains themselves (22%), the general beauty (22%) , other natural features of parkland (animals, lakes, nature — 10%), and/or to specific natural attractions such as the hot springs (5%), Lake Louise (2%), or the Icefields (1%). A further 2-in-lO seem to have visited the parks as a by-product of a tour itinerary or while en route to another location (18%) , whereas 1-in-lO visitors are attracted by the skiing potential offered in Banff or Jasper National Park.
Publicity about the parks is mentioned, in this context, by about l-in-12 visitors to Banff or Jasper National Parks, whereas informal advertising (through friends/relatives) encourages more than l-in-20 to come.
The parks' visitor populations differ in the extent to which they are drawn to the Banff/Jasper system because it is part of a tour or en route to another location. Jasper visi- tors are much more likely to explain their visit to the parks system in this manner (24%) than are visitors to Banff National Park (15%) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-86-
Exhibit 50
Actual
Weighted/Projected In Thousands
Volunteered Features That Attracted/Influenced Visitors To Banf f/JaBp>er National Parks Asong Person Visitors^ To An Alberta Park...
In
(2,270) (3,898.6) %
SUBtfP?! Fall
(1,147) (359) (382)
(1,551.8) (355.1) (1,403.1)
Spring (382) (588.5) %
Any Reference To;
General Beauty/ Scenery
The Parks/Rocky Mountains
22
22
27
28
30
25
14
13
23
24
Enroute To Another Location/Part Of Tour
Nature/Forests/ Lakes/Wildlife
To See Animals/
Wildlife The Lakes Nature
18
10
23
12
18
13 7
15 16
3 1 12
Skiing
Specific Natural Attractions
10
26 5
16
Hot Springs Lake Louise The Icefields
14 1
Publicity
Get Away FroB City/ People
Visit/Meet Friends/ Relatives
Past Experience/Been Here Before
15 5 5
11
2 12 8 4
Beard About It FroB
Relatives/Friends 6
BUcing 4
Fishing 2
13 3 1
1 7 12
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 63>13/18)
^Spent time, Boney, or went sightseeing in Banff or Jasper National Parks 2see Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
35. b) Volunteered Features That Attract Visitors To Banff Or Jasper National Park By Season
Of visitors to Banff or Jasper National Parks, those that come in the winter season are least apt to comment on the natural beauty, scenery or terrain as reasons for their visit. Instead, these winter visitors are more likely than others to include skiing and a need to escape from "civilization" (city/ people) as factors that attracted them to Banff or Jasper National Park.
Summer visitors, on the other hand, are particularly inclined to indicate that their visit to the Alberta parks was made because it was part of a tour, or because they traversed the territory en route to another location. The high proportion of summer visitors who describe their trip as a "touring vacation^" supports this explanation for visiting Banff or Jasper.
Formal publicity and word-of-mouth are more character- istically offered by summer visitors to explain what attracted them to the parks. Simultaneously, these types of responses are especially uncommon among winter and spring visitors.
The hot springs seem to hold a special attraction for spring visitors. Spring visitors include this natural feature among those that attracted them to the Banff/Jasper system to a greater extent than do parks* visitors in other seasons.
•"•These data derive from the self-completion attitudinal questionnaire (Detailed Tables, Volume II, page 62-3). See questionnaire appended for definitions of the various trip classifications .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-87-
Exhibit 51
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Overall Rating Of Visit To Banff/Jasper National Parks Anong Person Visitors^ To..
An
Alberta Park
(2,270)
(3,898.6)
%
Banff (1,738) (3,167.5) %
Jasper (1,325) (1,598.9) %
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
Don't Know/Not Stated
45 36 15 2 *
2
47 36 14 1 *
2
48 33 16 1 1 2
Average'
4.3
4.3
4.3
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 65-1)
^Spent tine, money, or went sightseeing in specific park. ^Averages based on assigned values of 5 equal to "Excellent" to 1 equal to "Poor".
*Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
36. a) Overall Rating Of Visit To The Banff /Jasper National Parks By Parks Visited
All visitors to Banff and Jasper National Parks were asked to rate their visit to these parks, using a five point semantic scale ranging from "excellent" to "poor". Numerical values were assigned to the scale at the tabulation stage to yield average ratings (from 5 = "excellent" to 1 = "poor") . The reader should note that visitors were not rating the Alberta parks, nor each individual park, but their visit to these parks.
The visit to the Alberta parks was obviously very suc- cessful for the vast majority of tourists. More than 8-in-lO person visitors describe their time in the parks as "excellent" or "very good", with more opting for the superlative (45%) than for the next most positive description (36%) . Disappointment with the parks visit is voiced by fewer than l-in-33 person visitors to the Alberta parks.
Appraisals of the park visit do not differ to any appreciable extent between person visitors who spent time, money or went sightseeing in Banff National Park versus those who engaged in these activities in Jasper National Park.
An examination of the detailed findings, however, reveals some differences worthy of comment:
• Overnight visitors to the two parks are considerably more likely to describe their trip as "excellent" (52%) than are those who are same-day visitors (36%) ;
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-88-
I
L
r
L
L
• Among overnight visitors, those who spent nights in hotels, motels, resorts or lodges are somewhat less likely to extol their trip ("excellent" 50%) than are campers ("excellent" 57%) ;
• Residents of the parks' immediate catchment areas — Alberta (40%) and British Columbia (39%) — are least likely to declare their visit to Banff or Jasper "excellent", whereas residents of the United States are most likely to do so (65%).
-89-
■
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
xhibit 52
ctual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Overall Rating Of Visit To Banff/Jasper National Parks Among Person Visitors^ To An Alberta Park.
In
Total (2,270) (3,898.6) %
^n. . .Season^
SumTTier Fall
(1,147) (1,551.8) %
(359) (355.1) %
Winter (382) (1,403.1) %
Spring (382) (588.5) %
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
Don*t Know/ Not Stated
45 36 15 2 *
53 29 15 1 *
55 31 11 *
34 45 17 2
43 38 14 3 1
Average
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.1
4.2
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 65-3)
^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in Banff or Jasper National Parks ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
^Averages based on assigned values of 5 equal to ••Excellent" to 1 equal to "Poor".
*Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
36. b) Overall Rating Of Visit To The Banff/Jasper National Parks By Season
Among seasonal groupings, winter visitors are the most conservative in the rating they ascribe to their visit to Banff and Jasper National Parks. Approximately one-third of these visitors claim that the visit was •♦excellent", compared to more than one-half of their summer and fall counterparts. It is important to note that their reticence in according the visit an "excellent" rating should not suggest that winter visitors are dissatisfied with their visit. Almost 8-in-lO winter visitors consider their visit to be "excellent" or "very good" — a proportion almost identical to that evident for every other season.
In the previous section, it was noted that Albertans are somewhat restrained in the rating they give the parks relative to visitors from other origins. This finding may be linked to the winter visitor rating since Albertans are significantly over-represented in this season compared to others.
Rusion/Tomany & Associates lid.
-90-
Exhibit 53
Actual
We ighted/Pro j ected , In Thousands
None, Mo Inproveaients Necessary/Keep Natxiral/ Less Touristy
8unary Of Volunteered Areas For Zaproveaent/Added Facilities, Services, Or Attractions In Banff/Jasper National Parks Aaong Person Visitors^ To...
An
Alberta £ax]s
(2,270) (3,898.6) %
28
Banff
(1,738) (3,167.5) %
26
Jflgp?r
(1,325) (1,598.9) %
30
Any Ref^rgngg Tp;
Improveinents To/More Townsite Facilities And Services (Restaurants, Hotels, Washrooms, Service, Etc.) 18
Improvements To/More Roads/ Traffic/Parking/Signage 14
Improvements To/More Parks Facilities (Camping, Trails, Washrooms, Etc.) 12
Too Expensive/Prices Too High 5
Improvements To/Expansion Of Ski Facilities 2
Improve/More Local Transportation 1
19 15
12 5 3 1
16 11
14 5
Miscellaneous Other Don't Know/Not Stated
20 16
20 16
18 16
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 67-1/6)
^Spent time, money, or vent sightseeing in specific park. *Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomony & Associates Ud.
3 7. a) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And Jasper National Parks Bv Parks Visited
Visitors to Banff and Jasper National Parks were asked to describe, in their own words, what attractions, facilities or services they would like to see established or improved in these two parks. In this and the following section, these recommen- dations are examined on the basis of broad categories. In the third section of this sequence, more detailed comments are examined.
Satisfaction with the status quo is the single most commonly volunteered response when visitors are asked to describe desireable changes. Almost 3-in-lO person visitors to the two Alberta parks indicate that no improvements are necessary or suggest that the parks be kept in their current "natural" state.
Suggestions for changes or improvements are most apt to focus on townsite facilities (18%) , roads, traffic or signage (14%) , and camping facilities (12%) . Complaints about high prices are voiced in this context by l-in-20 visitors, whereas recommendations related to ski hills are volunteered by about l-in-50. Highly idiosyncratic suggestions that do not permit generalization are made by l-in-5 Alberta parks' visitors ("miscellaneous") , while somewhat fewer volunteer no response to this question.
There are no significant differences between Banff and Jasper visitors in terms of the types of suggestions they make
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-91-
in this unaided context. Place of residence, however, does offer some interesting variations:
• Albertans and Americans are somewhat more inter- ested in seeing the roads and traffic situation within the two Alberta parks improved; and
• Canadians from provinces other than Alberta along with overseas visitors are especially apt to support the status quo (no improvements/keep natural) .
Not surprisingly, users of camping facilities within the parks are also stronger proponents of the current state of the parks (37%) than are their counterparts who spent nights in the parks' roofed accommodation (21%) . Naturally, campers are also more inclined than other visitors to suggest the need for improve- ment to parks' facilities such as camping, trails and wash- rooms .
Ruston/Tomany St Associates Ltd.
-92-
Exhibit 54
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Suaaary Of Volunteered Areas For laproveBent/Added Facilities, Services, Or Attractions In Banff /Jasper National Parks Aaong Person Visitors^ To An Alberta Park. . .
In
(2,270) (3,898.6) %
In, . .ggpgpn^.
Summer (1,147) (1,551.8) %
rail
(359) (355.1) %
(382) (1,403.1) %
Spring (382) (588.5) %
None, No iBproveaents Necessary/Keep Natural/Less Touristy
28
32
34
20
32
Any Reference To;
Improvements To/More Townsite Facilities And Services (Restaurants , Hotels, Washrooms, Service, Etc.)
Improvements To/More Roads/Traffic/ Parking/Signage
Improvements To/More Parks Facilities (Camping, Trails, Washrooms, Etc.)
Too Expensive/ Prices Too High
Improvements To/ Expansion Of Ski Facilities
Improve/More Local Transportation
18
14
12
16
12
15
15
12
14
20
15
23 14
11 8
1 1
Miscellaneous Other
Don't Know/Not Stated
20
16
19
10
28
18 28
21
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 67-13/18)
Ispent time, aoney, or went sightseeing in Banff or Jasper National Park ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
37. b) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And Jasper National Parks By Season
As is evident from the facing table, there are few significant variations in recommended improvements or changes to Banff and Jasper National Parks across the four seasons:
• Predictably, only winter^ (6%) or spring (1%) visitors recommend alterations to ski facilities;
• Winter and spring tourists are likely to be more highly concentrated in the townsites than are visitors in summer and fall. This may explain the more concerted call for improvements to townsite facilities by visitors in these seasons.
•''The high level of ••don't know/not stated" in winter compared to all other seasons is likely a result of the self-completion format of the winter questionnaire. In all other seasons, this question was administered by an interviewer.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
Specific I»prov«»ents Keconended For Banff /Jasper National Parks ABong Person Visitors^ To...
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
An Alberta £ftUs
(2,270) (3,896.6) %
ftantl
(1.738) (3,167.5) %
(1.325) (1.596.9) %
An Albert.a Park
(1,147) (1.551.8) %
Kintsx
(382) (1.403.1) %
Trarfic/Rgads
I»prove/Pave Roads/
Should Be Smoother 6 More Parking In
Banf f/DowT>tovn Area 4 Better/More Road
Signs/Directional
Signs 3 Widen Roade/4 Lanes 1
AcggppdalifiD
Hotels/AccoBtBodation
(Miscellaneous
Problems) 3 Cheaper Lodging,'
Hotels Too Expensive 2 More Hotels/
AccoBBodation 2
rgpd/BgYcraqc
More Restaurants/
Places To Eat (Any) 3 Inprove Restaurants/
Places To Eat 1 Lower Restaurant/
Food Prices 1
CBir ground p
More Canping Sites 3 Inprove Caapsites
(Miscellaneous) 2 More Hook-Ups/
Electric Facilities 2 Heed Showers/Hot
Showers In Caap-
grounds/More Showers 2
SXi racmtigp
Expand/Improve
Facilities At Ski
Areas 2 Expand Ski Runs 1
General
iBprove Public
Washrooms Keep Maturalness/Do
Hot CoBsercialize More Public
HashrooBs Too Expensive/ Prices
Should CoBe Down More/Better/Updated
Inforaation/
PaBphlets/Maps Have Movies/Theatre/
Concerts Better/Ma intalnad/More
Trails/Hiking Trails
Rona/Mo Zaprav« Macaasary
Its
4 4
3 2
2 2 1
23
4
3 4
2
2 2 2
23
1 5 4
3
3 2 1
24
7 2 2
3 5 2
13
(Source: Detailed Tables, VoIubc I, pages 67-1/4, 67-13/17)
^Spent tiBe, money, or went aightseeing in specific park. *Smm Foreword for definition of seasons.
•Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomony & Assockrtes lid.
37. c) Volunteered Areas For Improvements In Banff And Jasper National Parks — In Detail
As is evident from the detailed descriptions of improve- ments recommended by visitors to Banff or Jasper National Park, no single issue emerges as a focal point for change. Instead, the tourist's "wish list" (and a park planner's nightmare) reflects a multiplicity of concerns that probably derive from the individualized expectations a visitor brings to the parks, and the unique nature of his or her experience in Banff or Jasper National Park.
The only subject that generates comment by at least l-in-20 visitors pertains to the condition of road surfaces (6%) . Visitors also include a desire for more parking in the townsites' downtown areas, improvements to public washrooms, and a wish to keep the parks natural (4% each) among the more commonly voiced recommendations.
Winter tourists express marginally more concern about parking in townsites and about road surfaces than do their summer counterparts. While they request more traditional sources of entertainment (movies, theatre, concerts) than do summer visitors, winter park patrons are also more likely to support a "naturalist" position with respect to the parks (7%) than are their summer counterparts (1%) .
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
-94-
Exhibit 56
Usage Of InforiDation Centres, Naturalist Services, Interpretive Events Or Hot Spring Pools Among Rocky Mountain National Parks Person Visitors-*^ To...
A
An British Any Alberta Columbia Park Park Banff Jasper Park
Actual (1,987) (1,906) (1,398) (1,018) (380)
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands (3,875.2) (3,689.8) (2,989.2) (1,427.0) (661.5)
% % % % %
Used Any Services 44 42 45 46 73
Used Services In...
Banff 32 33 41 28 36
Jasper 14 15 12 39 24
Yoho 4 3 4 6 25
Kootenay 7 5 6 6 41
Did Not Use Any
Services 56 58 55 54 28
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 31-1)
Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in specific park, excluding charter and non-English respondents — question not included on questionnaire.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
38. a) Usage Of Specific Park Services Bv Parks Visited
Park visitors^ were asked to indicate whether they used or visited a park information centre, naturalist service, interpretive event or hot springs pool in each of the parks they visited. This question yields a positive response from more than 4-in-lO visitors to the four parks (unduplicated count) . None of the specified park services was utilized by the remain- ing visitors (56%) during their stay in the Rocky Mountain National Parks.
The incidence of usage of a park service is quite stable across Banff and Jasper National Parks, but is appreciably higher among individuals who visit one or both of the British Columbia parks. This finding is undoubtedly related to the high level of overlap between Alberta park visitors and those who visit the British Columbia parks.
Not surprisingly, Banff visitors are most apt to have used a park service within this park (41%) , although more than 1-in-lO indicate that they made use of one of the specified services in Jasper National Park. The situation among Jasper visitors parallels that evident for Banff. These visitors are most likely to have used a park service within Jasper (39%) , but are also inclined to use such services within Banff National Park (28%) .
The impact of overlap between an Alberta park and a British Columbia park is evident in the service locations named
^The non-English and charter versions of the questionnaire did not include this question.
The figures reported herein pertain only to qualified "visitors". For figures related to total park entrants, see the Detailed Tables, Volume I.
95
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
L L L
L
[ L [ [ [ [ [
L [
r
L
L i
L L
by individuals who visited Yoho or Kootenay. Among these vi- sitors, l-in-3 used a park service in Banff; l-in-4 used these services in Jasper and/or Yoho National Parks; and considerably more (41%) used them in Kootenay, likely because of the popular ity of the hot springs in this park.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ud.
-96-
Exhibit 57
Actual
Weighted/Projected, In Thousands
Usage Of Information Centres, Naturalist Services. Interpretive Events Or Bot Spring Pools Asong Roc)cy Mountain National Parks Person Visitors^ To Any Park. . .
In
(1,987)
In. . ♦ Season^
(999)
(295)
(348)
(345)
(3,875.2) (1,537.9) (375.7) (1,390.6) (571.0)
Used Any Services
44
58
42
29
42
Used Services In,
Banff
Jasper
Yoho
Kootenay
32
14
38
27
11
33
14
11
24 3 1 2
35
Did Not Use Any Services
56
42
59
71
58
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 31-3)
^Spent tiae, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky Mountain National Parks, •xcluding charter and non-English respondents question not included on questionnaire.
*See Foreword for definition of seasons.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
38. b) Usage Of Specific Park Services By Season
Use of information centres, naturalist services, interpretive events or hot spring pools is most widespread in the summer season. Almost 6-in-lO Rocky Mountain National Parks visitors claim to utilize these services during this season, compared to a low of 3-in-lO in the winter. The two shoulder seasons exhibit a level of use that falls about mid-way between the peak season levels (42% each) .
Interestingly, utilization of the specified park services in Banff National Park remains constant across three of the four seasons, experiencing a significant decline only in the winter. In contrast, use of these facilities in Jasper National Park peaks in the summer, declines significantly in the fall, and experiences a yearly low through the winter and spring.
Ruston/Tomany & Assockrtes Ltd.
-97-
Exhibit 58
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
Stated iBpact Of Olyaplcs On Decision To Visit Rocky Mountain National Parks Asong Visitors^ To...
Any Park
An
Alberta
Jagp?r
(1,325)
(2,351) (2.270) (1.738)
(4.084.0) (3.898.6) (3.167.5) (1.598.9) % % % %
A
British
Columbia
Park
(538)
(748.3)
%
The Olynpics Had Nothing To Do With My Decision To Visit The Parks 94
94
93
95
96
I Visited The Parks Because I Was In The Area To Help Stage, Cover Or Participate In Olympic Events
I Visited The Parks Because I Was In The Area To Watch The Olympics^
Things I Saw Or Heard About In Connection With The Olympics Made Me Want To Visit The Parks
I Had To Reschedule My Plans To Visit The Parks Because Of The Olympics
Not Stated
(Source: Detailed Tables. Volume I. page 69-1)
Jspent time, aoney. or went sightseeing in specific park. 'This statement was included during the winter season only.
*Less than 0.5%
Sr Associates lid.
39. a) Stated Impact Of The 1988 Winter Olympics By Parks Visited
The 1988 Winter Olympic Games were held in Calgary, Alberta during the data collection stage of this study. While it was never the intention of the study to measure the impact of this event on visitation to the Rocky Mountain National Parks, a question was included to obtain the visitor's impressions of the impact these Games had on his or her decision to visit the parks .
When the statements on the facing page were presented to visitors, only 1-in-lOO indicated that they came to the region because they were spectators at the Olympics. A further l-in-33 claim that advertising about the Olympics encouraged them to visit the parks. Thus, according to most visitors' own per- ceptions, "the Olympics had nothing to do with" the decision to visit the parks (94%) .
The few visitors who state that their decision to visit the parks was influenced in a primary (spectator) or secondary (advertising/promotional materials) manner are spread evenly across the four Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-98-
Exhibit 59
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
Stated Impact Of Olyapics On Decision To Visit Roc)cy Mountain National Parks Aaong Person Visitors^ To Any Park . . .
In
SuptJT\f r Fall Winter spring
(2,351) (1,189) (378) (390) (394)
(4,084.0) (1,646.1) (391.8) (1,441.5) (604.6) % % % % %
The Olympics Had Nothing To Do With My Decision To Visit The Parks
94
94
96
93
95
I Visited The Parks Because I Was In The Area To Help Stage, Cover Or Participate In Olympic Events
I Visited The Parks Because I Was In The Area To Watch The Olympics-'
Things I Saw Or Heard About In Connection With The Olympics Made Me Want To Visit The Parks
N/A N/A
N/A
I Had To Reschedule My Plans To Visit The Parks Because Of The Olympics
Not Stated
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, page 69-3)
^Spent time, money, or went sightseeing in at least one of the Rocky
Mountain National Parks. ^See Foreword for definition of seasons.
^This statement was included during the winter season only.
*Less than 0.5%
Ruston/Tomcary & Associates Ltd.
39. b) Stated Impact Of The 1988 Winter Olympics By Season
Not surprisingly, visitors who claim to have been in the vicinity of the Rocky Mountain National Parks because they were there to view the Olympics are found solely in the winter. On the other hand, promotional materials related to the Olympics seem to have been as influential in the summer (4%) as they were in the winter (2%) among the small proportions of visitors who mention them.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates Ltd.
-99-
[ [
[
u
[
r u
[
[ [ [ [
APPENDICES
• Additional Summary Tables
• Stage In Life Cycle Definitions
• Questionnaires
1
1^
[ [ [
[
[
L
L [ C
c
L [
Exhibit 60
Actual
Weighted/Projected , In Thousands
Profile Of Roofed And Canping Person Nights Spent In The Rocky Mountain National Par)cs
Total
Person
Nights
(4,721)
(6,063.1)
%
Total
Roofed
Person
hishts
(1,177) (4,246.5) %
Total Camping Person Nights
(380)
(1,388.4)
t
Season^
Summer Fall Winter Spring
47 9 34 11
35 9 43 13
81 10 6 4
Place Of Residence Canada Alberta
British Columbia Other Provinces
U.S.A.
Overseas
Japan
West Germany
59
40 6 13
26 15
59
41 4
13
28
13
59
38 9 12
27 14
Mode Of Entry
Private Vehicle Scheduled Bus/Train Charter
81 8 11
75 10 16
97 3
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 44-3, 5)
^See Foreword for definition of seasons. *Less than 0.5%.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
i
[
L
Exhibit 61
Whether Roc)cy Mountain National Parks Was Main Destination Of Trip And Entire Trip Purpose Aaong Person Visitors^ To...
An
|
Any |
Alberta |
Banff |
Columbia Park |
||
|
Actual Weighted/Projected, In Thousands |
(2,351) (4,084.0) |
(2,270) (3,898.6) |
(1,738) (3,167.5) |
(1,325) (1, 598.9) |
(538) (748.3) |
|
% |
% % |
||||
|
Roc)cy Mountain National Parks Main Destination |
|||||
|
Yes No |
61 39 |
62 38 |
64 36 |
54 46 |
56 44 |
|
Actual^ Weighted/Projected, In Thousands |
(2,018) (3,894.2) |
(1,937) (3,708.8) |
(1,428) (3,008.1) |
(1,043) (1,439.8) |
(384) (666.9) |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
Main Purpose Of Entire Trio
Business (Any)
Pleasure
8
76
8
76
10 76
7 74
4
86
|
Vacation |
59 |
59 |
58 |
66 |
78 |
|
Recreational |
|||||
|
Day Use |
16 |
16 |
17 |
7 |
6 |
|
Visit Vacation |
|||||
|
Home |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Personal (Any)
17
17
16
21
11
(Source: Detailed Tables, Volume I, pages 20-1, 23-1/2)
^Spent time, noney, or went sightseeing in specific park. ^Excludes charter visitors — (juestion not asked.
Ruston/Tomany & Associate^ lid.
L L [ [ [ [
L
[ [ [
[
m
[
L [
1
L
r
L L
1
stage In Life Cycle
Visitors were asked to provide information on their "household, regardless of whether they travelled with you on your trip to the parks". Several items of information were used in conjunction to locate each visitor household in terms of their stage in life:
• Age of chief wage earner (under 45 years or 45 years or more) ;
• Size of household;
• Incidence of children under 18 years;
• Incidence of children under 6 years. Life cycle stages are as follows:
• Young Singles: Under 45 years, one person in household.
• Young Couples/cooperative units: Under 4 5 years, 2 or more persons in household, no children 18 years or less.
• Young Families: Under 45 years, 2 or more persons in household, at least one child under 6 years (can have older children) .
• Middle Families: Under 45 years, 2 or more persons in household, children 6 years to 18 years only.
• Older Families: 45 years or older, 2 or more persons in household, children of any age.
1
I' ■ ,
Ruston/Toxnany & Associates Ltd.
L
r
L [ [ [ I
[ [
m
L
r
L
[
L
(
L
[
• Older Singles: 45 years or older, one person in household.
• Older Couples: 45 years or older, 2 or more persons in household, no children 18 years or less.
Ruston/Tomany & Associates lid.
[
L
L
SUMMER ROADSIDE QUESTIONNAIRE AND SHOW CARDS
L
Ruston/Toreany 4 Associates Ltd.
Roadside Screener
R/T 191S1
5- 1
6- 1
7- 1 6/
|
A.^'. |
13- |
|||
|
Location : |
Start : |
P.M. |
14- |
|
|
A . K. |
||||
|
Date : |
Finish : |
P.P.. |
||
|
Day |
Month |
1t- |
||
|
Interviewer : |
lE- |
|||
INTRODUCTION: Hello, try name is
of Ruston/Tocar.y (
Associates. We are conducting a study on behalf of the GovernmentE of Canada, Alberta and British Columbia on the four National Parks, Banff, Jasper, Yoho and Kootenay.
IF RESPONDENT REFUSES TO BE INTERVIEWED BEFORE SCREENING IS COMPLETED, CIRCLE BELOW, AND SAVE THIS SCREENEP.
REFUSED BEFORE SCREENING
1 SAVE SCREENEP
19-
1.
-b:
c)
•d)
RECORD NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN VEHICLE IN THE TWO AGE GROUPS. IF YOU CANNOT COMPLETE THIS BY OBSERVATION, ASK THE DRIVER TO TELL YOU HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE VEHICLE ARE:
16 YEARS OR OVER
(WRITE IN)
UNDER 16 YEARS
(WRITE in;
20- 21- 22- 23- age , fall
(HAND CARD 1)
2-a) Does anyone in this vehicle, who is at least 16 years o
into any of these categories? Just tell Tne the nuEberCs) opposite the descriptions that apply to any people in this vehicle. RECORD BELOW.
NONE
On a sales/service call/pick-up/delivery Mer±»er of a work crew/enployee in Parks Commuting to or from work or school Permanent/seasonal resident in Parks
|
' 1 |
SKIP TC 0.2 \ |
|
2 |
|
|
TERMINATE |
|
|
3 |
Aicr SAVE |
|
SCREENEP |
|
|
4 |
Is everyone in this vehicle a permanent/seasonal resident in the parks?
Yes No
25-1 1 TERMINATE AND SAVE SCREENEP 2
How many people in this vehicle who are 16 years of age or older are permanent/seasonal residents in the parks? (RECORD BELOw;
RESIDENTS 16-t-
None
(WRITE IN) 00
26- 27-
And how many people in this vehicle who are under 16 years of age are pemanent/seasonal residents in the Parks? (RECORD BELCw;
RESIDENTS UNDER 16
None
(WRITE IN) 00
2E- 29-
TERMINATE AND SAVF SCREENEP
IF ONLY ONE PERSON IN VEHICLE 16 YEAPS OP OLDEP , SKIP TC 0. 4 . IF MOPE THAN ONE PERSON IN VEHICLE 16 YEARS OP OLDER, ASK 0.3. No., would like to interview one person fror your vehicle. Of all tht people 16 years of age or older, whose birthday is next?
WRITE IN NAME OF PERSON WHO HAS THE NEXT BIRTHDAY:.
AND ADMINISTER REMAINDER OF QUESTIONNAIRE WITH THIS PERSON.
(HAND CARD 2) Please look at this aap of the four Parks. Dc yc^ personally plan to return to areas within the Parks' boundaries before you return hone from this trip?
Leaving for the last time Plan to return
30-1
THANF RESPONDENT, TERMINATE INTERVIEW
IF RESPONDENT QUALIFIES TO BE INTERVIEWED BUT REFUSES, CIPCLE EEL AND SAVE THIS SCREENER.
QUALIFIED BUT REFUSED 3I-{ 1 SAVE SCREENEF I
32/45 ELA^
Puston/Toinany i Associates
F/T 19:
Roadside Questionnaire
5. Where is your regular place of residence? (WPITE IN CITY,
PROVINCE/STATE, COUNTRY). 4f
<E
CITY OR T0W7,-
PROVINCE OR STATE
CO'JNTJ-
6-a) What is the furthest place froic home you have visited or vii: v;e; on this trip? 49
CITY OR T0K7,'
PROVINCE OR STATE
COUNT F
•b) Is the National Parks Syster the B»ain destination of your trip Yes 52-1 No 2
-c) (HAJ^D CAJ^D 3) Which one of the descriptions listed on this card best describes the ma in purpose of your entire trip? RECORi: ONE ONLY BELOW.
Business: Attend a special ineeting
like a conference, convention, seir.inar or trade show 53-1
Other Business 2
Personal: Family affairs: e.g.
visiting friends or
relatives, weddings,
funerals, etc. 3
Errands: e.g. shopping banking, doctor, etc.
Pleasure: Vacation
Recreational day-use
Visit vacation home
Other (SPECIFY)
-4-
(HAIJD CAJ^D 2 AGAIN)
7-a) CIRCLE CODE 2 BESIDE THE PARX RESPONDENT IS EXITING FROK AND DC NCT READ THAT PARK. FOR THE OTHER THREE PARKS ASK:
Please look again at this »ap. Eince leaving hooe on thas trip, d:d you at any tine enter ... (READ EACH PARK EXCEPT CIRCLED ONE)?
|
Ii5 |
|||
|
Banff National Park |
- 1 |
2 |
|
|
Jasper National Park |
55 |
- 1 |
2 |
|
Yoho National Park |
56 |
- 1 |
2 |
|
Kootenay National Park |
57 |
- 1 |
2 |
-b) FOR EACH PARK ENTERED IN C.7-A), ASK:
Did you use or visit Parks infonnation centres, naturalist services interpretive events or hot springs pools in (READ EACH FArK tNIIEIDI?
Yes
No
3anf f Jasper Yoho Kocter.ay 58-1 59-1 60-1 61-1 2 2 2 2
FOR EACH PARK ENTERED IN Q.7-a), ASK:
While in (READ PARK) . did you stop and spend any tiine or ir.oney cr d; any sightseeing or were you just passing through?
Just passing through
Spent time/rconey/went sightseeing
Banff Jasper Yoho Kootenay 62-2 63-2 64-2 65-2
IF SPENT TIME IN ANY PARK (ANY CODE 1 CIRCLED) SKIP TO VISITOR SECTION (Q.12 TO END) . I
IF SPENT liO TIME IN ANY PARK (liO CODE 1 CIRCLED), ASK C.7-d) .
■d) Did you or anyone else in the vehicle stop at all in the Parks t; purchase any food or gas or spend any money?
No
Yes
66-
2 GO TO PASS-THROUGH SECTION (O-B-ll)
■e) And in which Parks did you do that?
Banff National Park 67-1
Jasper National Park 2
Yoho National Park 3
Kootenay National Park 4
NOW SKIP TO VISITOR SECTION (0.12 TO END)
[
i
-5-
PASS-THROUGH SECTION
How many nights, if any, will you be away froic home on this g - 1 : r f trip?
SAME DAY TRIP/NO NIGHTS AWAY OOO tE-
NUMBER OF NIGHTS 7:
(WRITE Ih,
(REFER RZSPONDENT TO CARD 2 AGAIN)
Please Bhow bc exactly where you entereci the National ParV.s syste- for the first tipe on this trip away froc hoir.e? R2C0RD C02L Ff:y KAP FOR POINT OF ENTRY.
|
Location |
1 |
(HWY |
16 |
- EAST GATE) |
71-1 |
|
Location |
2 |
(HWY |
16 |
- WEST GATE) |
2 |
|
Location |
3 |
(HVY |
11 |
- EAST GATE) |
3 |
|
Location |
4 |
(HWY |
1 - |
WEST GATE) |
4 |
|
Location |
5 |
(HWY |
93 |
- WEST GATE) |
5 |
|
Location |
6 |
(HWY |
1 - |
EAST GATE) |
6 |
CAJ^'T REMEMBER
(HAND CALENDAR - CARD 4) 10. What was the date of this first entry into the National Parks Syster? This calendar ir.ay help you recall the date if you ca: easily reir,eTr±>er . RECORD DATE BELOW.
73
Day Month 11. And was that... (READ LIST)?
Between 6 a.in. and 12 noon 76-1
Froff. noon to six o'clock p.ir.. 2
Between 6. p.m. and midnight 3
or Fror. midnight to 6 a.m. 4
CAN'T REMEMBER 9
NOW SKIP TO DEMOGRAPHICS SECTION (Q.21 TO END)
VISITOR SECTION
5-1 €-2
CHECK B>:K to O t-t), 3. IT HATIONAL FA^KS EYSTE*' IS
KAIN DtSTlKATJON. SKIP TO 0.12-b). OTHin^ZSl ASV Q.12-*).
(KA>-D CAJ^D 3 ACAIK)
V>-ich ore of the detcrlptionj li»t«d on thi» c»rd b*»t de»rrlb»» the »8ir. purpose of your trip to the K»tion«l P*rk»? (RICORL OM FJRPOSZ ONLY)
Businesc Attend • speri*} Beetlnq
like ft conference, convention,
ftcr-inar or trade show 13-1
Other Business 2
Personal: Farily affairs: m.g.
visiting friends or
relatives, veddangs,
funerals, etc. 3
Errands: •.g. shopping,
tanking, doctor, etc. 4
Pleasure: Vacation 5
Pecreationa] day-use 6
Visit vacation hore 7
Just Passing Through •
-fc) How riany nights, if any, vill you be away fror ho»e on this entire trip?
' SKy.l DAY TR:F/N0 nights away I OZZ SKIP TC 0. 14 I 1<-
15-
KJy.BZh or NIGHTS 1€-
(WKITE INj
-c) And how »any rights, in total, did you spend in the National Parks since leaving hore en this trip?
SPEKT NO NIGHTS IN THE PARKS j ODO SVIF TC 0.14 I 17-
lE-
KUKBEF or NIGHTS 2N THE PARKS 19-
(VTRITE INj
-7-
13-«) What w«( the n»tte and location of the •ccoMod at i on you uatf for your firtt (second/thi rd/«t c . ) ovamight stop ih the Parka?
-t) (HXVD CA^r 5.) In which of the »ccoMo6ation typet llatei here 6:6
you »tay in RI^l^ LOCATION^. IF MORI TKXN OKI TYFL OF ACCOKy.DDAT : OS IN A>y LOCATION, RICORD LACH TYPI ON flPAJU^TE LINES.
-c) And how »any nighta did you »tay In a yiAr' ACCOK*f ^DAT I ON there?
(ASK rOF EACH ACCOKMDDATION TYPE USED. HXPEAT -a), -fcj AK: -c) TOF NEXT OVERSIGHT STOP AND ALL EL'BSEO'JENT OVERNIGHT STOPS IN THI Pkfy .
|
CONT |
INVE UNTIL ALL KIGHTS KENTIONED |
IN Q |
12-C) ACCOUNTED TO? . ) |
|||||
|
1 . |
Hot el /note l/r«»ort /lodge |
4. |
Youth Hostel |
|||||
|
2 . |
CoTirercial cottage/cabin |
5. |
Carpsitt/trailer parV |
|||||
|
3 . |
hti and Breakfast |
6. 7. |
Eack country carping Friends/relat ives/owT- vaceticr here |
|||||
|
"t ] |
And Lore tic. T\'re |
PI |
-b) -c) AccorrodBt ior 1 Nio^-.ts |
|||||
|
2 0- |
22-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 23- |
|
|
26- |
26-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 25- |
|
|
32- |
34-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 35- |
|
|
36- |
40-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 41- |
|
|
44- |
46-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 47- |
|
|
50- |
52-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 53- |
|
|
56- |
56-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 59- |
|
|
62- |
64-1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 65- |
|
|
CHIC IN 0 |
K THAT TOTAL KV^BER OF NIGHTS .12-C) . |
IN |
C.13-C) EC'JALS KLY.BER OF NIGHT |
48/69 BLANK
The following gur»tion» ftr« •bout •jcp«ndi tur«» by • 1 1 t h f
t>f rplf In thi» vehicle.
24-«) Were a::^ of the ©itpenfte* for thl» trip to the Hetionel Perk* p»id for be i ere you ©ntered the Perks?
No 70-1 1 EMF TO C .Til
Yes 2
(HX.V? CAFT 6)
-b) Did anyone purcheee • pre-peld peckegc for thi» trip vhich Include
•t leett two of the ites( shown on this card?
No -Ji-i 1 s>:f t: c.:-n Yes 7
Ib'B) Which of the it«»t on this card were Included in the pre-paid package?
By Air 72-1
|
By Train |
2 |
|
|
By Bus |
3 |
|
|
By Boat |
4 |
|
|
ACCO>:y.DDATION |
||
|
ir hosi |
||
|
roOD/BIVERACE |
6 |
CIRCLED |
|
SKIP TO |
||
|
EKTERTAIKyiKT/ACTIVlTIES/ |
||
|
SICHTSEEIKC/TOURS/Uri TICKETS ETC. |
7 |
|
|
AVTO RENTAL (PICKED UF IN THE PARKS) |
e |
|
|
AVTO RENTAL (PICKED UP ELSEWHERE) |
9 |
-b) IF TRANSPORTATION (AIR, TRAIN, BUS OR BOAT) MENTIONED IN C-15-a), ASK: Where did you first board the transportation vhich was included in your package? 73
74
75
(NEAREST CITV/TOVTN) (PROVINCE/STATE) (COUNTRY
•c) How many nights in total were included in the price of this packag
(WRITE IN) 7fc
I IF NO NIGHTS. SKIF TC -e ) I 77
(NUMBER OF NIGHTS) 76
-d) And how Bany of these nights wert »pent in the Parks?
13
5-1 I IF NO NIGHTS. SKIP TO -C) 1 14
€-3 KUWBER OF NIGHTS IN PARKS) 15
-») What was the total •mount paid for tH people in this vehicle for the pre-paid package? When you tell »e the cost, please tell »e whether it Is in Canadian, U.S., er Aone other currency.
Aaount C^n. U.S. Othtr (SPECIFY} 1^
$ ao-1 3
•f) And, how many people, Including children, does this •nount cover?
71
(WRITE IN KimBER) 22
It. W«r« any other itcBit prepaid for thi» trip to th» Farkt^
y«K 23-1
ho \ 2 CMF Q,n )
a7-«) (KXND UrSPONDEKT CAJ^D 7) ¥hich Of th» lt«»» on this c«rd vtr» ptii for before you •ntered the nation*! Perk». but were ^ct pjrchBiei • part of • pecXege or tour? RICORD UNDER 0.17-«) ON CFIL BELOW.
rOF EACH ITEM PRE-PAID SEPARATELY, kSY Q.ll-h) TO 0.17-«).
-t) Whet veK the tot»l arount p»ld in •dvgnce for all people ir th:»
vehicle for (READ ITEK FROM 0.17-»)? RECORD UKDEP Q.17-k; O? CP:D
be:x)w.
•c) It that in Canediin, U.S. or so^e other currency? RECORD UNDEP
Q.17-C) ON GRID BELOW.
211^ iLr?;^': l-s. ct-i-
(s?i::r J ;
AVTC RENTAL (PICKED UF IN THE PAJ^KS) 24- 1 $ 1 2 25-
•ACCOKMDDATION 2 $ 1 2 29-
•rOOD/BEVERASE 3 $ 1 2 3 3-
•ENTERTAIN'y.EKT/ ACTIVITIES/ SIGHTSEEIN3/
TOURS/LIFT TICKETS 4 S 1 2 37-
KDKE OF THESE I t BYZT TC O.lg 1
•FOR EACH ASTERISKED ITEK ASK -d) AKD -«) .
-d) How Bany nights in total were included in the price of the prepaid fPE^D ZIZY.) ?. RECORD UNDER -d) BELOW. IF KO KICHTS INCLUDE::. DC KOT ASK Q. 17-e) .
-e) And hov »any of these nights were spent in the Parks? RECORD UNDEF
-e) BELOW.
-d) -e)
TgTAL MCKTS KICHTS IN pax^v?
Accoiwodation 4l» 50-
Food/Beverage 44- 53-
Entertainaent 47- 5f-
lB-«) (HAND CAKD •) For ••rh •ifp«nfiitur» category en thl» c«rd, plstte ten »e, In C»n»(3a»n don»r», tht tot«l •»ount ppent within the Parks by •vtryDnr in th« vthiclt alnc* l»«ving ho**"* Include purch6»e» »»(3e by c«»h, cr»iit card, tr»vt]l»r'» ch«q-je tnd cheq--e. (ir AFPLICABLI: However, do Hfil Include the pr«p»id •)cp«n»e» ve have Already diacuaaed.)
How »uch was spent by •vervone in the v«hicl« for...? RICOF.D XrrVK' XhT CURRENCY TifPI fOP ^ATh CATECORy USTED.
Lcd;ing In the Parka, •xcluding carping ^trailer park 59- 01
Cacping f*cs 02
Food and beverages bought in restaurants in the Parks 03
Groceries i Beverages bought in stores in the Parks 04
Vehicle Cas 4 Oil. »aint«nance cr repairs bojght fror stations within the Parks 05
Transportation within the Parks including shuttle buses, tsxis, •tc. 06
Autc Fental for vehicles picked up in the Parks 07
Pecreation i EntertainTrer.t including tours, tickets, • qfjipnent rentals, etc. 06
Ccrference or convention registration fees 09
Park entrance fees/licence fees 10
Retail store purchases, such ss souvenirs, eqf-uipffient , filv, clothing, ttc. €0- 11
X^.D'JKT IN
CTHEP CURRXNCY
€5- 73-
77.
5-1 €-4
13-
17.
21-
25- 25
33
IF PETAIL PURCHASES MORE THXS $300 CANADIAN OR $200 U.S., ASK: 'b) Did you or snyone in this vehicle purchase sny individual iters which cost Biore than $300 Canadian (or $200 U.S.)?
Ho 37-j 1 SKIP TO 0.19 1
Yes
•c) What were those itcas and how Buch did ^ach cost? RECORD BELOW.
3B- 44-
40- 46-
42- 52-
WDTE: IT HISPONDrNT UKWJLLlNC TO OP CAJWOT BRLXX DOW tXPrKDITVRTS . ASK:
le-d) Fi*»fte just give mt your k>«st •tllBtt* of the tot«l asount tpv^nt by •vtr>one In th« vehicle while In th» Uttional ^arkt »y»ttt for tJ^e it«ct •ho^-r, en tht card. MCORD XND CUWLtNCY »ILOW.
TOTAL tSTlKATI I 40-
now COKFLTTE fOJiXlhlhC QUESTIONS WJTH DR3CINAL WSPOKDEKT DMV .
RTFEP BACK TO Q.7-«). IF ia:SK>NDEKT EKTERED BA>Tr XND/OF JASPEF WAT:0NAL PAWCS. ask Q.19-«), -b) AKI? -C), OTHERWISE 5K2F TO 0.20.
19-») What •ttracted you cr lnflu»nc»c3 your decision to travel to the
Banff/Jasper National Parks •ystcs en this trip? (RECORD VTFBATIKJ
61-
62-
63-
-fc) Overall, vould you rate your visit to the Banff/Jatper national Parks Syster «s (RIAD LIST}...?
Excellent 64- 1
Very Good 2
Good 3
Pair 4
or Poor 5
DON'T KNOW 9
-c) What attractions, facilities or services would you like to »ee
•statlished er irproved in Banff or Jasper National Parks? (RICOFD VERBATIM)
65-
66-
67
20-*} (HXKD CARD) Which ef the »tateI^ents en this card best describes the iir.pact the staging of the 1986 Winter Olyrpics had on your decision to sake this trip?
2 visited the Parks because I was in the area to help stage, cover or participate in Olyspic events 66- 1
Things X saw er heard about in connection with the Olympics Bade Bc want to visit the Parks 2
2 had to reschedule sy plans to visit the Parks because of the Olyspics 9
OR The Olyspics had nothing to do with my decision to visit the Parks
4
-12-
DEMOGRAPHICS SECTION
3 jutt hav* ft fmv Bor* gu»ftions to h«Ip uk clftsslfy tht
lr>forB»tion.
21. Wivr CAKr 9. Tl9B%t ten »e the ftge ania ttx of •vtrvorf in t>.it
v«^.icIe, »t»rlln9 vlth yoursrM •nfl then contlnuin? froc eid«»i tc younqett. ri*«»e jutt tell »c the latter b«eide the appropriate age cetegor>' .
An clher pccvperti cf ve^:clf
|
■ |
Respondent |
-2- |
|||||||||||
|
A |
0-5 years |
• 9 |
-1 |
71-1 |
73-1 |
75-1 |
13-1 |
15-1 |
17-1 |
19-1 |
|||
|
B |
*-15 |
years |
« |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|||
|
C |
16-19 |
years |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|||
|
D |
20-24 |
years |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|||
|
I |
I |
25-34 |
years |
5 |
S |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
||
|
r |
35-44 |
years |
€ |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
|||
|
1 |
c |
45-54 |
years |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
||
|
K |
S5-64 |
years |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
|||
|
■ |
I |
€5-74 |
years |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
||
|
J 75 years or 111 |
ever |
0 |
5- 1 6- 5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
|
Kale |
70 |
-1 |
72-1 |
74-1 |
76-1 |
14-1 |
16-1 |
lB-1 |
20-1 |
||||
|
resale |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
22. HAND CXKD 10. Vhich letter best describes the last year cf schocling you cospleted?
A Sone ala^entary/grade school 21- 1
B Cosplated alaitientary/grade school 2
C So^e high school/aecondary school 3
D Corplated high school/aacondary
school 4
E Technical or vocational school/
CoBAunity Collage/CECEP 5
r SoBc Univarsity 6
C Cosplatad University 7
H Post Graduate ceursea/degrae •
23. What Is your occupation? I don't Bean the nave of the coppany, but juat the type of job snd type of coapany. (ir RTTIRID, CHECK BOX)
. IN . 22-
(TYPI or JOB) (TyPI or COKPXNV)
(] ll£TZR£D
•13
34. Car, 3 grt your rtase and cospltt* Bftlllr>Q address including
po»t»}/iip coir''
IU:SK>KDrKT WAxr
CITy/TOVO.-: FUDVIHCl/fTATE
K>STAL/2IP CODE: 2 3
IT fHOn CANADA OJ? UKITID STATES kSY:
My pupcrviftor say van! to call you to vtrify that I conductt^ tJ^ia interview. At vhat phone nu2±>cr can you usually be reached?
XRLA CODI TELEPHDHI KJy.BLf^
|
RECORD VEHICLE TYPE |
|||
|
VeMcle T\T?e |
|||
|
AutOBObile/Van 29 |
-1 |
||
|
Light Ti-uck/Pick-up |
2 |
Tent Trailer |
30-1 |
|
Tr\jck Cacper |
3 |
Travel Trailer |
2 |
|
«otorho»e/F.V. |
4 |
Horse Trailer |
3 |
|
Motorcycle |
3nd Vehicle |
4 |
|
|
Bicycle |
6 |
||
|
Hiker/Pedestrian |
7 |
||
|
Other fSPECiry) |
|||
|
Xr RESPONDEKT IS PAS5- |
TKRDUCH |
(Q.8 TO 11) , DO vol C2VI |
RAILBACK. |
SAY:
Thank you very »uch for your co-operation. In appreciation we vould like you to have tJ^is Alberta souvenir.
ir RISPOKDENT 2S VISITOR (Q.12 TO 20 ), SAY:
Thank you very Buch for taking part In this purvey. I vould like to leave this questionnaire vith you to fill out and sail back to us.
The anvelope provided is already addressed and atacped for your convenience. Your answers will help to improve park services ani2 facilities in the future.
xr FROM DUTSIDE CANADA JtlAD:
Hill you be Balling thia fron Canada or the Cnitad States? (HANI^
APPROPRIATE EKVELOPE).
Please cosplate and return this questionnaire in the nert few days, if possible.
In appreciation for your cooperation, we would like you to have this Alberta souvenir.
31/34
\/TO''ANY & Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
CARD 1 (Q.2-A)
2 On A SA.ES CALL. A SERVICE CALL. A PICK-UP OR DELIVERY
3 A KEMBER OF A KDRK-CKEW OR AN EMPLOYEE IN THE PARKS k C0^'V-',lTIN6 to or FROM WORK OR SCHOOl
5 A PERMANENT OR SEASONAL RESIDENT IN THE PARKS
t
Rl'STon/To'any & Associates Ltd.
R/T 19131
(0.6-C. 0.12-A)
Business
Attending a special meeting like a conference/ convention, seminar or trade shok
Other Business
Persona.
FAN'.ILY AFFAIRS: E.G. VISITING FRIENDS OR RELATIVES/ WEDDINGS/ FUNERALS/ ETC
Errands: e.g. shopping/ banking/ doctor/ etc.
Pi^EASURE
Vacation
Recreational day-use
Visiting vacation hot-'-e
Rw'STOS^To.ANY 4 ASSOCIATES LTD.
R/T 19151
JULY
1 *i T 1 r s
1 J 3 4
« • 7 • f IC M
12 13 i« i& II n II
30 31 33 24 2S
}l 3-> }l }fi 3C
S *« 1 «^ T f I
1 2
) « S • 7 • t
10 11 O 13 1« 1& 1ft
11 1i 1» JC J» JJ 23 U 7% H 27 21 21 iO
31
• T » 7 r I
1 > } « ft •
7 t ft 10 11 12 13
14 %% U 11 II II 20
}i 2} 23 24 2k 21 21
U i% iO
|
S 4K |
7 |
7 |
f |
ft |
|
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
|||
|
« ft |
ft |
7 |
ft |
1 |
<C |
|
11 i: |
13 |
14 |
i» |
17 |
|
|
r 11 11 |
2C |
3' |
3: |
33 |
34 |
|
2» 21 |
31 |
31 |
31 |
3r |
3' |
|
1 * " |
7 |
7 |
» |
ft |
|
|
) |
« |
1 |
I |
7 |
|
|
* * |
10 |
^ 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
' U 11 |
17 |
11 |
11 |
3: |
3' |
|
23 33 1 |
24 |
2» |
2» |
3' |
31 |
|
MARCH |
|||||
|
S ft« |
7 |
«^ |
7 |
t |
ft |
|
1 2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
ft |
7 |
|
1 * * |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
11 11 |
11 |
11 |
2: |
31 |
|
|
23 2) |
24 |
2i |
21 |
37 |
21 |
|
^ 21 j: |
3t |
||||
|
ft |
7 |
«b |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
« |
|||
|
% |
ft |
7 |
ft |
1 |
1C |
1 1 |
|
1? |
13 |
%4 |
1» |
1ft |
»7 |
11 |
|
19 |
3C |
VI |
23 |
33 |
24 |
2ft |
|
}t |
3' |
31 |
39 |
3C |
31 |
AUGUST
ft M 7 T f ft
1
2 2 « ft ft 7 ft
I 10 11 13 13 14 1ft
1ft 17 II II 30 31 33
33 34 2ft 2ft 37 21 21
2C 21
|
ft M 7 |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
ft |
|
ft 7 • |
f |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
|
13 14 1ft |
11 |
17 |
11 |
11 |
|
2C 31 23 |
23 |
24 |
2ft |
2ft |
|
3 7 31 21 |
K) |
|||
|
OCTOBER |
||||
|
ft M 7 |
7 |
9 |
S |
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
||
|
4 ft ft |
7 |
ft |
ft |
10 |
|
11 13 13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
|
11 11 20 |
21 |
33 |
23 |
34 |
|
2ft 2ft 37 |
21 |
21 |
20 |
31 |
lyOVCMBER
|
ft •* 7 |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
|
1 2 1 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
|
• ft 10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
|
1ft 1ft 17 |
Ift |
Ift |
20 |
21 |
|
23 23 14 |
Ift |
Ift |
2? |
Ift |
|
11 >0 |
||||
|
DECCMBER |
||||
|
t ft« 7 |
T |
f |
B |
|
|
1 |
f |
1 |
4 |
ft |
|
• IB |
• |
10 |
11 |
13 |
|
13 14 1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
11 |
|
to 21 23 |
23 |
24 |
II |
Ift |
|
17 II II |
10 |
It |
1988
^Aft^UARY
JULY
|
B |
M |
7 |
«^ |
7 |
9 |
ft |
ft |
44 |
7 |
7 |
9 |
ft |
||
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|||||||||||
|
1 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
ft |
ft |
1 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
I |
ft |
|
|
10 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
• ft |
11 |
10 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
Ift |
11 |
|
|
17 |
11 |
11 |
2C |
31 |
32 |
33 |
17 |
1ft |
11 |
30 |
31 |
37 |
33 |
|
|
14 |
Ift |
Ift |
27 |
II |
21 |
30 |
24 |
Ift |
Ift |
27 |
II |
21 |
||
|
21 |
21 |
flBRUARY
|
B id |
7 |
«^ |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
|
7 ft |
ft |
10 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
|
14 1ft |
11 |
17 |
11 |
11 |
20 |
|
21 23 |
23 |
14 |
2ft |
Ift |
27 |
|
21 21 |
|||||
|
MARCH |
|||||
|
ft M |
7 |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
|
1 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
|
|
ft 7 |
ft |
ft |
10 |
11 |
13 |
|
13 14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
11 |
|
10 21 |
23 |
23 |
24 |
Ift |
21 |
|
17 Ift |
II |
3C |
31 |
||
|
A^RiL |
|||||
|
B M |
7 |
¥t |
7 |
f |
ft |
|
1 |
1 |
||||
|
3 4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
B |
ft |
|
10 11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
11 |
|
17 1ft |
11 |
20 |
21 |
33 |
23 |
|
14 II |
Ift |
27 |
II |
II |
30 |
MAY
|
B |
T |
T |
9 |
B |
||
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
ft |
• |
7 |
|
B |
B |
ie |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
|
71 |
11 |
17 |
1ft |
11 |
10 |
21 |
|
13 |
13 |
14 |
tft |
tft |
17 |
tft |
|
tft |
11 |
JUNl
|
« |
t |
1 |
4 |
|||
|
B |
B |
B |
B |
te |
11 |
|
|
12 |
12 |
14 |
1ft |
11 |
17 |
tft |
|
1ft |
to |
11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
Ift |
|
M |
27 |
II |
II |
>0 |
AUGUST
|
ft M 7 1^ |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
1 1 3 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
|
7 ft ft 10 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
|
14 1ft 1ft 17 |
11 |
19 |
30 |
|
|i 33 33 34 |
Ift |
Ift |
27 |
|
21 21 30 31 |
|||
|
SEPTEMBER |
|||
|
ft M 7 » |
7 |
9 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
4 ft ft 7 |
ft |
I |
10 |
|
11 13 13 14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
|
1ft 11 20 21 |
23 |
3) |
24 |
|
tft Ift 37 II |
21 |
>0 |
|
|
OCTOBER |
|||
|
ft M 7 «k |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
t t 4 ft |
ft |
7 |
1 ft |
|
ft 10 11 13 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
|
1ft 17 11 11 |
30 |
31 |
22 |
|
13 14 2ft 2ft |
27 |
21 |
29 |
|
K 31 |
|||
|
NOVEMBER |
|||
|
1 t |
3 |
4 |
ft |
|
B 7 B t |
10 |
11 |
13 |
|
13 14 1ft 11 |
17 |
11 |
19 |
|
to 21 23 23 |
14 |
Ift |
Ift |
|
17 II It to |
|||
|
DECEMBER |
|||
|
1 |
t |
1 |
|
|
• B B T |
B |
ft |
ie |
|
ti 12 13 14 |
11 |
11 |
17 |
|
tft 11 to 11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
tft tft 17 II |
tl |
ftO |
11 |
RjsTON/To'Af.>i 6 Associates Ltd. R/T 19151
(Q.13-B) Hotel, motel/ resort or lodge comn'.ercia^ cottage or cabin
Bed AND BREAKFAST E STAB. I SK^'.E NT
Youth hostel
C;^MPsiTE or trailer park Back country camping Kith friends or relatives or at your
OWN VACATION HOf-'.E b>
1.
2. 3. k. 5. 6. 7.
Rj5Tcr,/To',ANY I Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
(O.U-B)
TRAf;SPORTATIOr>:
EY AIR
BY TRAIK
BY B'JS
BY BOAT ACCOfvCDATION FOOD OR BEVERAGE
EN'TERTAINfCNT. ACTIVITIES, SIGHTSEEItG, TOURS, OR LIFT TICKETS, ETC.
AUTO RENTAL (PICKED UP IN BAffF, JASPER, YOHO OR KOOTENAY NATIW^AL PARKS)
AUTO RENTAL (PICKED UP ELSE^^WERE)
RjsTCf./To'^'ANY i Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
CARD 7 (Q.17-A)
AUTO RENTAL (PICKED UP IN BANFF, JASPER, YOHO OR KOOTEf^Y KATIOf.AL PARKS
ACCOf-V-DDATION
FOOD OR BEVERAGE
ENTERTAINMENT, ACTIVITIES, SIGHTSEEING, TOURS OR LIFT TICKETS
NOr^E OF THESE
i
Rc'STCN/To'ANY & Associates Ltd.
R/T 19131
(Q.IB-A)
Lodging in the Parks, excluding camping or trailer park C/^^'.^iNG fees
FODD AND BEVERAGES BOUGHT I N" RESTAURANTS/ HOTELS OR BARS
IN THE Parks
Groceries & Beverages bought in stores in the Parks Vehicle Gas & Oil. maintenance or repairs bought
FR0^' stations within THE PARKS
Transportation within the Parks, including shuttle buses, taxis. etc.
Auto Rental for vehicles picked up in the Parks
Recreation & Entertainment including tours, tickets, equipment rentals, etc,
Conference or convention registration fees
Park entrance fees/licence fees
Retail store purchases, such as souvenirs, equipment, film, clothing, etc.
RjSTCfv'To'iNv s Associates Ltd.
R/T 191^1
CtR? FDR D.??
I VISITED THE PARKS BECAUSE I KAS THE AREA TO HELP STAGE, COVER OR PARTICIPATE IM OLYMPIC EVENTS
THIhCS I OR HEARD ABOUT IN CONNECTION WITH THE OLYMPICS N'ADE ^'£ KANT TO VISIT THE PARKS
I HAD TO RESCHEDULE MY PLANS TO VISIT THE PARKS BECAUSE OF THE aYMP I CS
OR k
THE aYMP ICS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH KY DECISION TO VISIT THE PARKS
R.sTON/To'.ANY & Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
(Q.21)
A 0-5 YEARS
B 6-15 YEARS
C 16-19 YEARS
D YEARS
E 25-3^ YEARS
F 35-A^ YEARS
6 ^5-5^ YEARS
H 55-6^ YEARS
I 65-7^ YEARS
J 75 YEARS OR OVER
Rc'STON/To-'^N> & Associates Ltd.
R/T 19131
(C.22)
A SO'.E ELEMENTARY OR GRADE SCHOOu
B Completed elementary or grade schoo^
C SON'.E HIGH SCHOOL OR SECONDARY SCHOOL
D COM.PLETED HIGH SCHOOL OR SECONDARY SCHOO.
E Technical or vocational school / Community College or CEGlP
F Sof-'.E University
6 CoMPi.ETED University
H Post Graduate courses or degree
WINTER ROADSIDE QUESTIONNAIRE AND SHOW CARDS
-1-
Fjston/Tocar.y 4 As»oci«t«K Ltd
6-1 • /
Location Date :
Day
Interviewer :
f tert :
Honth
k.r. 13-
F.K. 14-
k.r..
15-
le-
ef HuKton/Tocft'";y &
IKTROD'JCTIOK: Hello, By riAs^e is
Associates. We are conducting • study on behaM of the Covernrerts ci Canada, Alberta *nd British Colu&bia on the four Kationa} Parks, Banff Jasper, Yoho snd Kootenay.
IF RTSPDNDEKT REFUSES TO BE iKTEPVItVED BEPOPE fCRTEKING IS COMPLETED, CIRCLE BELOW, AND SAVE THIS 5CREEKEP.
REFUSED BEFORE SCREENING 1 1 SA\T SCFIISIF I
19<
1.
RECORD KUMBER OF PEOPLE IN VEHICLE IN THE TW'O ACE CROUPS. IF YOV CAwNNOT COMPLETE THIS BV OBSERVATION, ASK THE DRIVER TO TELL YO'J HDW KANV PEOPLE IN THE VEHICLE AKE :
16 YEAPS OR OVER
(WRITE INJ
UNDER 16 YEARS
(WT.ITE IN;
20- 21- 22- 23-
(HAND CARD 1)
2-a) Does snyone in this vehicle, vho is at Isast 16 years of sge, fall into any of these categories? Just tell »e the nuaber(s) opposite the descriptions that apply to sr.v people in this vehicle. RECORD BELOW.
NONE
On • »ales/»ervice cal 1/picK-up/del ivery >!er±>er of a work crev/«ff.ployee in Parks Coimuting to or froa work or school Fer&ancnt/seasonal resident in Parks
24-i I gMF T; C.3
|
2 |
|
|
TERMINATE |
|
|
3 |
AND SAVE |
|
SCREEKEF |
|
|
i |
Is everyone in this vehicle a peraanent/aeasonal resident in the parks?
Yes
Ho
aS-1 1 TERMINATE AS'D SAVE SCFEENIF I
How mtny people In this vehicle vho are 16 years of age or older are persanent/seasonal residents in the parks? (RECORD BELOW)
RESIDENTS 164
Hone
(WRITE IN) 00
2fc- 27-
•d) And how aany paopla in this vehicle vho are under 16 years of age are pervanent/aeasonal residents in the Parks? (RECORD BELOw;
lasiDEKTS UNDER 16 None
(WRITE IN) 00
26-
29-
TTRMINATE AND SA\T SCREESEF
-2-
3. IT OKLY pvr PrFSrV IK VTHJCLT 1€ YIAKS OF OLDtP . MTZT TC D . 4 . IF
frPJ- THA\ OKI PtKSOK JK VlH:CLr 1€ YtAXS OF OLDEP, 1^ X C 3 . How, J vouid Jlke to lnt«rvi«w ent |>«r»on frox your v«hlcl«. Of all the p«opI« 16 y*ftr» of agt or oldtr, vho»t felrLhday !• rMrt?
WKiTE iw wxw: or ferson who bxs tmi irrrr BirrHDAY:
kSl JLDKIKISTEF RTKAINDEF OF QUESTl OKKAI M WITH T>llt M.RSOS.
(MAVD CXFT 2) ri«a»t look at thU ••r tJ^» four Mrk». Dc ^ pcrBonaHy plan to r«turT> to •r«a» within lha Farka' ^urtd«ri*& b«for« you rttum ho>» fros this trip?
Laaving for the l»at tiac
20-1
Flan to raturn
TtW.INATE IKTEFVirv.
ir RISPOKDEKT QUALIFIES TO BE IKTEFVIIVID BUT FirUSES. CIFCLT BILOW XKD «A\'E THIS SCRTENER.
OUAUriED B'JT WrUSED, 1 £A\T SrP.EESTP i
Where la your regular place of raaidance? (WRITE XK CITY, PROVINCE/STATE, COUKTRV) . 4£-
4-7-
46-
ClTi' OR TOWT. PROVINCE OR STATE CO'JKTRV
(HAND CARD 2 AGAIN) 49/i3
r e. CIPrLE code 2 beside the park RESROKDEKT is rxiTINS FROK an: DC KDT
READ THAT PARX' . FOR THE OTHER THREE PARKS ASK:
B. Please lock again at thia sap. Since leaving hove en this trip, 6ii
you at any tiee anter . . . (READ EACH PARK EXCEPT CIRCLED OKI;?
il
|
Hi |
||
|
Banff National Park |
S4- 1 |
2 |
|
Jaaper national Park |
55- 1 |
2 |
|
Yoho National Park |
56- 1 |
2 |
|
Kootanay National Park |
57- 1 |
2 |
7-a) FOR EACH PARX EKTERID XK Q. « ). ASK:
ti6 you tiae ©r viait FarKa information centres, Mturaliat aervices, ^ interpretive avanta or hot springs poola in fRXAD EACT PA^k
r^r.ri jAi^n ifilifi Kpgltr.Bv
■•^ Yas 51-1 59-1 50-1 51-1
Mo 2 2 a 2
1^
1^
•3-
7-t) rOP tACH FXR> tKTERXD IN 0-* ). XSK:
While In fRIxr yXP.> ) . did you Hop snd •F>«nd any tl»e or money or d: •ny sightfteting or vtre you just p*»»ing through?
Ju»t p«»sing through «2-2 43-2 •4-2 €5-2
Spent t l»e/»oney/v«nt •ightftteing
ir TIKI SPEKT IH XXY ^AJO'' (ND CODE 1 CI^CLTD) fFIP TC C IC MCOR::) WAXI XKD address XNT KA>-D O.-T FX£S-TKT<D-JCH OVtSTIOKSAIFJ
• e/i:
• -») In vhich of the parks, If any, did you spend tny right*** Did you •pend any nights In... (READ tACH PAJO^. EKTERID. RICORi; UKDEF -*) BELOW)?
•t) A-ny how Bany right* In toti] did you spend in...(R£AD tACW PAJJ In WhlCH KICHTS SPENT. IfRITE IK UKDEF -b) BELOWJ
5-fc
-t) €-2 SPEKT 1*0 WICKTS KL'MEEF OF
Banff National Park 1 2 11-
Jasper Wational Park 1 2 15-
Yoho National Park 1 2 19-
Koottnay National Park 1 2 23-
NO NIGHTS SPEKT IK PARKS 1
9-a) And now could you plaese give »e your bett •sticatc of the tcta!
•rcur.t ipent within the National Parka by •veryone In the ve^ic]e'» Please include all •xpenditurts »ade by cash, cheq\je, traveller's cheq-je and credit card. (WRITE IK AKDUKT BELOWj . And vhat currency Is that? (WRITE IN CURRXKCy BELOW) .
TOTAL tSTIKATE IN 27-
AKDUKT CURRXKCV
-b) Were ^zx the trpenses for this trip to the National Parks paid for before you snttrad the Parks?
No 31-1
Yes 3
HOW jaCORD NAKE AND ADDRISS AND HAND OUT VISITOR OUtSTIOK>iAlRI .
-4 -
10>«} Can I plea»r get your ntmt and coxplfft* »«ning •ddrtat including po»tal/xip code''
RXSPOKDEKT HAXI :
ADDRTSS :
|
rHOVm CI /STATE: |
|||
|
POSTAL/2 IP CODE: |
|||
|
32 |
|||
|
-fc) IT mow CANADA OF UNITED |
STATES ASK: |
||
|
Ky tuptrvitor Bay want to call you to |
verify that I condjctei |
||
|
thi» interview. At what |
phone nuxber |
can you usually be |
|
|
reached"* |
|||
|
AKIA CODE |
TELEPHDKE KLT-.EEP |
||
|
RICORD VIHICLT TYPE |
|||
|
Ve^icle TNT-e |
|||
|
AutOBObile/Van |
38-1 |
||
|
Light TrucK/PacK-up |
2 |
||
|
Truck Cacper |
3 |
Travel Trailer |
2 |
|
HotorhOBe/R.V. |
4 |
Horae Trailer |
3 |
|
Hotorcycle |
5 |
2nd Vehicle |
4 |
|
Bicycle |
6 |
||
|
Hiker/Pedestrian |
7 |
||
|
Other (SPZCIFY) |
KIAD:
Thank you very »uch for taking part in this purvey. 2 vould like to leave this questionnaire with you to fill out and Bail back to us. (HAND OUT PASS-THROUGH OR VISITOR QUEST! OKNAIRI Ah'D KAILBACK AS APPROPRIATE. )
IT mon OUTSIDE CANADA RLAD:
Vin you be Bailing this fros Canada or the United States? (KAKD APPROPRIATE EKVILOPE).
Flease cosplete mnd return this questionnaire in the next few days, if possible.
In appreciation for your coop>eration, ve would like you to have thi Alberta souvenir.
Fjston/Toftany 4 AftKociatcs Ltd.
IflKTEF R/T 19111
€-1
WationB] P«rkK Vi»itor Survey 7-1
11/
How »ar,y rights, If tny, will you bt tway frott ho»e on thi» tr.*. ire
tup?
Sarne (Jay trip/no nights away 000
WujLber of night* away fror home 12-
(Wr.ITI Ih)
(KAJiD CAJ^D 2 AGAIN)
Please look at the »ap of the four parks agein. Please indicate where you entered the National Parks for the first tire on this trip away fror horce. CIRCLE ONE ANSWER BELOW, USING CODE K-JV.rlF.S
15-
|
FOR PARy |
GATES SHOWN ON KAF. |
|
|
Code 1 |
(HWy 16 - EAST GATE) |
I |
|
Code 2 |
(KWy 16 - WEST GATE) |
2 |
|
Code 3 |
(KVy 11 - EAST GATE) |
3 |
|
Code 4 |
(HWy 1 - WEST GATE) |
4 |
|
Code 5 |
(HVy 93 - WEST GATE) |
5 |
|
Code 6 |
(HWy 1 - EAST GATE) |
6 |
|
CAJ^'T RTKEKBER |
9 |
3. (HAND CAJ^D 4)
On what date did you first anter the National Parks on this trip? This calendar nay help you recall. (RECORD DATE BELOW).
DAY MONTH YEAR
16-
.17-
18- 19-
And was that... (READ LIST)? 20-
21-
Between 6 a.B. and 12 noon
22-
FroB noon to aix o'clock p.B. Between € p. a. and aidnight or FroB Bidnight to 6 a.*.
CAN'T WJIEMBER
PJtAKe tell »e the Age and sex of •veryone in the v•^,icle, »ttrtir with yourfteir and continuing troe. oldest to youngest.
years (RISPONDrKT) 1 2 23-
years 2 2 21-
years 1 3 27-
years 1 3 25-
years 1 2 31-
years a 2 33-
years .1 2 35-
years 1 2 37-
What is your occupation? I don't »ean the nare of the corpary, bu just the type of job ind type of co&pany. (WF.ite IN. ZT KLZlfXl, CHECK BOX XND ASK WHAT TYPE OF JOB AND COMPANY RESPONDENT HAS RETIRED FROKj .
IN 39
(TYPE or JOB) (TYPE OF COMPANY)
I] RTTIRID
CHECK TO BE S'JRI YO'J HAVE riLLED O'JT NAME , ADDRXSS. PHONE Kl'MEEF VEHICLE TYPE ON PAGE 4 OF SCRIENER. THEN SAY;
Thank you very »uch for coTtpleting this questionnaire. In •ppreciation lor your cooperation we would like you to have this Alberta souvenir.
rj^aheh s :,e, Ruston/Tomony
jr.ic Ontario IP/ ^ ^ /. . • . /
^9" 1533 & Associates Lid.
Dear Visitor;
Fuston/ToBany 4 Associates, a Market research fine, Is conducting
- a study on behalf of the Covernaents of Canada, Alberta and British Coluir±^ia on the four Kational Parks - Banff, Jasper, Yoho
^ and Kootenay. The infoncation froa this study will be used to help plan the future of the Parks.
Could you please take a few »ottents to complete the two attached questionnaires and return then to us in the postage-paid envelope provided.
It is important that only one merher of your travel party
— coir.pletes the questionnaires. That person is the one who was selected to be interviewed when you were in the Parks.
^ Please ir.ail the corpleted questionnaires today •ither when you arrive hoice or when you stop for the night. Postage is already paid so you do not have to put stasps on the envelope if it is v.ailed in Canada or the U.S.
Finally, I would like to thank you for your co-operation and hope that you had a very enjoyable visit to the Parks.
Yours sincerely.
Denis Tomany President
DT/is
S^
Fu»ton/Tottany 4 As»ocl«t«» Ltd. 11/7 li.l
5-t
national l>arkK Visitor furvay
(Vialtor) 7-1
THIS O^STIOKXAIRT IS TO 11 COKPLTITD BY TKT tAXT MJLSOH IN TKI TRA'.TL PXKTY IfHD ¥KS fELZCTTD TO XHSWEJi TKI IinTFVl EVCP ' ft Q^JtSTIOHS IN THI PA?^ . THAT TZKSOh IB (MAXI ) .
For »o»t of the foHowing q^J•gtion», you vill bt provld«i vlth
•everal choicat with a nutber next to •ach one. flaate just
circle the nurber betide the answer you choose, for axsrple: Ky favourite colour Is...
Craer. 2 Blue 3 Yellow 4
a-e) What is the furthest place fror boir.e you have visited or will visit or, this trip?
4
4 1-
CITV OF TOW'S- FRCVIKCI OF STATI COVKTFi 42-
-fc) Was the National Park Syster the main destination of your trip?
Yes 1 43-
ho 2
2-a) K>.ich one of the descriptions listed belov best describes the re i- purpose of your entire trip? CIRCLE fiiii ONLY UKDEF C.2-a) BIL-Cw.
-t) Khich one of the descriptions listed belov best describes the rain purpose of your trip to the National Parks? CIRCLE ONLY UKCEF C.2-fc) BELOW.
-k)
titir. Purpose Of Naticr.el
Main Purpose Parks Pcrtic-.
p: Ir.lirc Iiic q: Iiap
Business: Attending • special Beeting like a conference, convention, »effinar or trade show
Other Business
Personal: Farily affairs: e.g. visiting friends er relatives, weddings, funerals, ate.
Errands: a.g. shopping, banking, doctor, etc.
Pleasure: Vacationing
Hecreational day-use Visiting vacation hoine
Just passing through
Other Purpose (SPECiry)
44-
45-
-2-
How »Bny night», If any, vill you b« away trov bo»e en thi» •r.tire
4€-
KUMBEP or WICHTS (tKTIIO: TRIP) . IT VZ VZZ^ri 4*?-
VhlTl IN AWAY PI-LAS I 4 6-
GO TO 0-e.
And how »»ny DiQhts in total, did you spend in th« M«tlon»: ?«rks since IsavinQ ho»« on Ihis trip?
49-
KUV.BER or NIGHTS IN THE FAXXS IT VZ VlZ^r^ 5C-
¥?:te in in pAj-ji 5:-
TO O-fc
ir YO'J STAYED OVTRNICHT IN THE FAWCS , PIXASE ANSWIP Q.5.
We sre interested in the overnight •ccoajcodetions you ir. the
Parks. For ••ch overnight stop you »ade at • different • ccoTtj^odation in the Parks, please write in the rare »ni the location of the •ccorjrodat ion , the type of •ccoitr.odat Ion it wa& ar,: the nuir±>er of nights you stayed there.
Leae-;d - TYPE Or ACCOKKDDATI ON
1) Hotel/Motel/Resort/Lodge 5)
2) Corj*>erciBl cottage/catln 6)
3) Bed snd breakfast 7}
4) Youth Hostel
Caspsite/trailer park
Back country csirping
rritnds/relativts/ovr. vacation ho»e
KAy.IS AKD
LOCATIONS or
(WTITE IN BELOW)
(RErEF. TO LECESr TO CIRCLE THE APPROPRIATE KUKBER BELOW)
$rvrKTH:23-. EIGHTH; 29-
or KICHTS
(w-?:te IN n-jmeir;
Were sny ef your sjcpenses for this trip to the Parks paid for before you sntered the National Parka?
ho Vss
1 PIXASE CO TO Q.IO
35-
ir YOU PRE-PAID XNY EXPENSES PGR THIS TRIP TO THE PARXS , PLEASE U^SWER Q.7.
7-B) paeasr indicate below the it«Tr» which you prtpald before yo. trt-erei the P*rK». (CIPCLT APPFDPRIATE KUHBEF UNDtF CCLL^ a).
-fc) For tech Ittrc prepaid Indicate whether It vaa part of • package
(i.e. 7 or sore Item purchased to9ether) or waa prepaid separately
(CIPCLX AFPFDPKIATr JTJKBERS UNDER COUTKN -b) .
-c) For •ach iter prepaid aerarate 1 v (not part of a package;, please
write in the total Brour.i paid. VRITE IN THE A^:-K: tLl THI CVRKESCY (E.G. FRANC, DtUTSCHKAKK, YEN. U.S. DCUAPS , CK^kllK'. DCLLAPS, tie.).
1TE^^S EEPA-
mpAir pa:ka:i e^^llli'
FOF iTE^.s fa::
«EPXW>TE1Y
ONLY pi::-:
31- 37-
3E-
Accorjnodation Food/beverages
4 3'
Frterta indent , trtivities, Sightseeing tours, lift tickets (excluding season lift passes)
Auto rental picked up in the Perks
47-
51-
A-'tc rental picked up outside the Parks
Transportation
None of these
I 9 PLIAgI GZ 1Z C."
.55- .55-
ir YO'J PFIFATD 3TEKS AS PAPT OF A PACKAGI PIXASE XKSWEP QVESTICN 6. OTHERWISE CO TO QUESTION 9.
|
£-a) |
What was the total trr.ount paid for all people in your vehicle fcr the prepaid package? WRITE IN Ay.OUNT AND CURRTNCY. |
|
|
s AKOUNT CURJIENCY |
f 3- |
|
|
How many nights in total were included in your prepaid package hov »any of those nights were spent in the Parks? |
and €7- |
|
|
NIGHTS IK TOTAL NIGHTS SPENT IN PARK |
7C- |
|
|
If transportation was included in your prepaid package, please in where you first boarded this transportation. |
write 73- 74- |
|
|
(NIAKEST) CITy/TOVTN PROVINCE/STATE COUNTRY |
IF YOU PREPAID ACCOMMODATION SEPARATELY (NOT AS PART OF A PACKAGE), PLEASE ANSWER QUESTION ». OTHERWISE CO TO QUESTION 10.
9. Hov »any nights in total did this prepaid accoirjr^odation cover and how »any of those nights were apent in the Parks?
75-
TOTAL NIGHTS PREPAID
NIGHTS IN PARK
ec/
-4-
5-e
lO-ft} For 9tch •xpcnditure category litted b«low, plaate Indicate the total •Tfojnt tpent withir. the ParKa by •veryone in the ve^.;cie during the entire visit In the Parka. Include purchaaea ntit fc>
caa^, credit card, traveller'* cheq^je and cheq-je. However, dc nz\ include any prepaid axpenaea listed In the previoua gueationa.
How »iuch vaa spent by avervpne in the vehicle for...? WCORr ky.Z'jy.z IN CANADIAN' DCLIAPS FOP 1^ CATECOPY LISTED BtL>OW. JJ ycv 1>Z^.'Z KNOW A-VD-wKT IN CANADIAN CC?JRZHZi' , WhZZl 2N XKDUNT AND SFICIFi THI CDRKENCy IN THE SPACE PROVIDED.
Lodging in the Parks, •xcluding carping 'trailer park
Carping fees
Groceries t Beverages bought in stores in the Parks
Vehicle Gas & Oil, Biaintenance cr repairs bought fror stations within the Park
Transportation v i t h i r the Parks including shuttletuses , taxis, etc.
Auto Pertal for vehicles picked up in the Parks
Pecreaticn i Entertainment including tours, lift tickets, e^jiprent rentals, stc, bought in the Parks
Conference or convention registration fees in the Parks
Park entrance fees/licence fees
OTHEF
(PLEASE tTlZZTx
Cl-'F-FE'.ri
ir NONE XKDVKT IN ky.ZJ^Z AN-D
CHEcy BOX cANAriA'. s lLLL_n-
12-
$ 13-
8 17-
$ 21-
$ 2 5-
$ 25-
S 33-
S 37-
$ <1-
$ 4 5-
5 4 5-
Focd end beverages bought in Festaurants or hotels or bars in the Parks
Fetail store purchases, such ss souvenirs, «TJipTf'er5t. , filr.,
clothing, «tc., bought in Parks {) % 53-
Approxinate Total $ 56-
e:-
•b) Did any vember ef your party use • season lift pass today? YES 1 NO 2
•c) For each person who used • season pass, please indicate the total price paid for that pass and the number of days the pass was used £2
Ihit trie-
lElSL WUMBER or PAYS UStP OK THIS TF!F
Parson 1 $
Parson 2 $
Parson 9 $
Parson 4 $
Parson 5
Plvtftf writ* In your ovr. vord» wh»t •ttr»ct«i you er lr.f)u«nc«f yc. dfcition to tr«v«} to tht ^nff/jA(ptr |f*tiona} Fftrkt syKtar or th;
trir^
C3-
•b) Overall, vould you r»te your vi»it to the Eanff/Jtiper national Parks Systcr as...? (CIT^CLE OKI AXSWIR) .
|
Cxctllcnt |
1 |
|
Very Good |
- 3 |
|
Cood |
3 |
|
Fair |
4 |
|
Poor |
5 |
-c) What attractions, facilities or services vould you like to sec
•stafclished cr icproved in Banff or Jasper National Parks? (wr.ITI 2K BELOW)
fcS-
€6-
€7-
12. Which of the following atatewents bast describes the icpect the ataging cf the 1988 Winter Olyrpics had cn your decision to eake this trip? (CIRCLE OKE ANSWER).
2 visited the Parks bacause 1 vas In the araa to help stage, cover or
participate in Olynpic events 1 €E*
2 visited the Parks bacause 2 vas in the araa to watch Olympic avants 2
Thin9s 2 saw or heard about in connection vJth the Olyrpics Bade
»e want to visit the Parks 3
2 had to reschedule »y plans to visit the Parks becauac of the Olympics 4
CR The Olynpics had nothing to do with ay
decision to visit the Parks 9
69/BC
P2t»ftr record tht aqt and sex i yourself. Write In your owr, fti
years
___________ years
years
years
years
_^___^^_ years __________ years
years
T everyone In Ihle vehicle, Incluii e end eex on the first lint.
11/22
1125
a 2 23-
a 3 25-
a a 27-
a 2 25-
a 2 31-
a 2 33-
a 2 35-
a 2 37-
Vhat is your occupation? 2 don't scan the naire of the corpar.y, bu just the type of jot end type of company. {W^ZTl IK. IF PXZIKLZ, ChTCK hZX XKD WKITI IN TYPI OF JOB XKD COKFXKV YOU KA\T RTTIRri^ FFOM) .
IN 35
(TYPI or JOB) (TyPI OF COKPANV)
13 RTTIRED
Thank you very «uch for corpleting this questionnaire. Please nov corplete the second questionnaire ebout vhat you did in the Parks •nd your opinions on the Parks end their facilities. When yoj hav completed both questionnaires, please put then in the envelope
provided .
PLEXSr KXIL THESE QUESTIOHNAIR£S TODAY.
POSTAGE IS ALREADY PAID SO YOU 00 NOT KA%T TO PITI STAKPS ON THI EK%TLOPE IF IT IS KAILED IN CANADA OP THE U.S.
RjsTON/To.ANY i Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
(Q.2-A)
2 On A SALES CALL, A SERVICE CALL/ A PICK-UP OR DELIVERY
3 A MEMBER OF A WORK-CREK OR AN EMPi^OYEE IN THE PARKS
k Commuting to or from work or school
5 A PERMANENT OR SEASONAL RESIDENT IN THE PARKS
Rjston/Tomany 4 Associates Ltd,
R/T 191S1
car::' i4
1987
JANUARY
|
1 M |
T |
T |
f |
S |
|
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
|||
|
« ft |
• |
1 |
1 |
t |
10 |
|
13 |
14 |
i» |
1ft |
17 |
|
|
«• *f |
3: |
3' |
3? |
33 |
24 |
|
7s }t |
37 |
31 |
3» |
3r |
31 |
|
rCSRUARY |
|||||
|
T |
1 |
r |
ft |
||
|
1 3 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
|
• • |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
17 |
11 |
It |
2C |
31 |
|
|
32 33 |
34 |
3b |
3ft |
27 |
31 |
|
MARCH |
|||||
|
T |
v» |
T |
f |
S |
|
|
1 2 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
• |
7 |
|
1 • |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
U 11 |
17 |
11 |
l» |
2C |
21 |
|
33 33 |
34 |
2i |
3ft |
27 |
3ft |
|
31 3C |
31 |
||||
|
APRIL |
|||||
|
i M |
T |
t^ |
T |
r |
S |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
||
|
ft ft |
7 |
• |
ft |
10 |
1 1 |
|
1? 13 |
14 |
1* |
1ft |
n |
1ft |
|
If 2C |
21 |
33 |
23 |
24 |
2S |
|
3( ?7 |
21 |
7i |
3C |
||
|
MAY |
|||||
|
S 1^ |
T |
T |
r |
S |
|
|
1 |
2 |
||||
|
3 * |
ft |
t |
7 |
1 |
t |
|
10 1 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
IS |
1ft |
|
17 11 |
19 |
30 |
21 |
23 |
23 |
|
34 2t |
3ft |
37 |
31 |
3» |
30 |
|
31 |
|||||
|
JUKI |
|||||
|
t M |
T |
9 |
S |
||
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
« |
% |
• |
|
V • |
f |
10 |
1 1 |
12 |
13 |
|
M 1% |
Ift |
17 |
11 |
1ft |
20 |
|
31 33 |
33 |
34 |
3k |
3ft |
37 |
|
3t 3» |
30 |
JULY
|
s M ^ |
«k |
T |
f |
S |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
6 ft 7 |
• |
ft |
10 |
1 t |
|
1? >3 14 |
ife |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
|
l« 2C V« |
33 |
33 |
34 |
3S |
|
3i 37 31 |
2ft |
30 |
31 |
|
|
AUGUST |
||||
|
1 1^ T |
T |
f |
S |
|
|
2 3 4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
1 • |
|
ft 10 11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
|
1ft 17 11 |
l» |
20 |
21 |
33 |
|
23 24 2i |
3ft |
27 |
3ft |
3ft |
|
3C 31 |
||||
|
SEPTEMBER |
||||
|
( M T |
¥, |
T |
F |
t |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
|
ft 7 • |
1 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
|
13 14 1ft |
1« |
17 |
1ft |
1ft |
|
20 21 2? |
33 |
34 |
3i |
3ft |
|
27 3ft 3ft |
30 |
OCTOBER
|
T |
9 |
S |
|
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
4 ft i 7 |
• |
ft |
10 |
|
11 12 13 14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
|
1ft 1ft 30 21 |
33 |
33 |
34 |
|
2S 2ft 27 2ft |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
NOVEMBER |
|||
|
i M T |
T |
f |
i |
|
13 14 |
ft |
• |
? |
|
• • 10 11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
|
1ft 1( 17 1ft |
tft |
30 |
31 |
|
32 33 34 2ft |
2ft |
27 |
21 |
|
2ft K) |
DECEMBER
|
s |
M |
T |
T |
f |
S |
|
|
% |
2 |
2 |
4 |
ft |
||
|
• |
7 |
• |
• |
10 |
11 |
12 |
|
13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
«t |
|
30 |
31 |
33 |
23 |
34 |
2ft |
»ft |
|
*7 |
3ft |
2ft |
30 |
3> |
1988
JANUARY
JULY
FEBRUARY
|
T |
¥> |
T |
» |
i |
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
• |
|
7 I |
ft |
10 |
1 1 |
12 |
13 |
|
14 1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
1ft |
30 |
|
21 23 |
33 |
34 |
3S |
3ft |
37 |
|
3> 29 |
|||||
|
MARCH |
|||||
|
ft M |
T |
¥> |
T |
» |
ft |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
|
|
• 9 |
• |
t |
10 |
1 1 |
12 |
|
13 14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
1ft |
|
30 31 |
22 |
33 |
34 |
2S |
2ft |
|
27 2ft |
3ft |
20 |
31 |
APRIL
|
s |
M |
T |
T |
9 |
t |
|
|
1 |
2 |
|||||
|
3 |
4 |
ft |
• |
7 |
• |
t |
|
10 |
1 1 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
|
17 |
11 |
1» |
30 |
31 |
32 |
33 |
|
24 |
2ft |
2ft |
37 |
2ft |
2ft |
20 |
|
MAY |
||||||
|
B |
fttf |
T |
Wf |
T |
ft |
i |
|
t |
2 |
1 |
4 |
ft |
• |
7 |
|
• |
f |
10 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
u |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
1ft |
30 |
21 |
|
22 |
23 |
24 |
2ft |
2ft |
37 |
2ft |
|
tft |
20 |
31 |
JUNE
|
ft |
T |
1 |
r |
S |
||
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
|||
|
• |
• |
2 |
• |
t |
10 |
11 |
|
13 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
|
1ft |
30 |
31 |
32 |
23 |
24 |
2ft |
|
2ft |
37 |
3ft |
3ft |
20 |
|
t |
7 |
7 |
9 1 |
t 3 |
S |
M |
7 |
«k |
T |
9 1 |
ft 3 |
|||
|
2 |
4 |
ft |
• |
7 |
• |
ft |
3 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
ft |
ft |
|
|
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
•ft |
1ft |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
Ift |
1ft |
|
|
17 |
1ft |
1ft |
30 |
21 |
23 |
33 |
17 |
1ft |
19 |
30 |
31 |
3? |
33 |
|
|
24 |
3ft |
3ft |
37 |
2ft |
3ft |
30 |
34 |
1% |
3« |
37 |
3ft |
39 |
3C |
|
|
31 |
31 |
AUGUST
|
1 |
7 |
7 |
9 |
ft |
||
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
ft |
ft |
|
|
7 |
• |
ft |
10 |
1 1 |
13 |
13 |
|
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
19 |
2: |
|
31 |
23 |
23 |
34 |
2& |
2ft |
27 |
|
3ft |
29 |
30 |
31 |
SEPTEMBER
|
S M 7 |
«k |
T |
9 |
ft |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
||
|
4 ft • |
7 |
i |
ft |
10 |
|
11 13 13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
|
1ft 1ft 30 |
21 |
23 |
33 |
34 |
|
3ft 3ft 37 |
3« |
29 |
3C |
|
|
OCTOBER |
||||
|
» M 7 |
¥> |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
2 2 4 |
ft |
ft |
7 |
1 1 |
|
• 10 11 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
1ft |
|
1ft 17 1ft |
l» |
20 |
21 |
33 |
|
33 34 3ft |
3ft |
27 |
3ft |
3ft |
|
20 31 |
||||
|
IWOVEMBER |
||||
|
ft M T |
1ft |
7 |
9 |
ft |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
• |
|
• 7 • |
• |
10 |
1 1 |
12 |
|
13 14 1ft |
1ft |
17 |
1ft |
19 |
|
30 31 33 |
33 |
34 |
3» |
3ft |
|
27 3ft 39 |
20 |
|||
|
DECEMBER |
||||
|
B M 7 |
» |
7 |
9 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
||
|
« 1 • |
7 |
1 |
ft |
10 |
|
11 13 13 |
14 |
1ft |
1ft |
17 |
|
1ft 1ft 20 |
31 |
33 |
33 |
34 |
|
2ft 2ft 27 |
3ft |
2ft |
20 |
31 |
RusTON/To^NY I Associates Ltd.
R/T 19151
A B C D E F G H I
J
> >
(Q.21)
0-5 YEARS 6-15 YEARS 16-19 YEARS 22-2^ YEARS 25-3^ YEARS YEARS ^5-5^ YEARS 55-6^ YEARS 65-7^ YEARS 75 YEARS OR OVER
ATTITUDINAL MAILBACK QUESTIONNAIRE
Distributed To All Parks Visitors In All Modes For Self -Completion
ta Ontario MSG IP7 i
977-1533
/Ibmcmy slates Lki.
I>«ar Rtipondtnt:
Thank you for taking tht tiae to take part in the national Parks Visitor Survey. This mailback questionnaire will provide us with the additional information ve require to get a cosplete and accur- ate record of your Park visit. The information you provide will be used to better the National Parks.
Your answers are axtramely important, so please complete the Questionnaire and return it in the stamped anvelope provided.
Tours sincerely,
•1-
ton/ToAany ft AssociatM Ltd. R/T 19151
5- 5
6- 1
THIS QUESTIONKAIRE IS TO B£ COMPLETED BY THE 8AME PERSON IN THE TRAVEL PARTY WHO WAS SELECTED TO ANSWER THE INTERVIEWER'S QUESTIONS IN THE PARK. THAT PERSW IS .
WAKE
7-Jl
A FEW INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE YOU BEGIN
Most questions are Bultiple choice, vith a number next to aach of the possible answers. To show your answer, just draw a circle around the number next to the answer that applies.
For axample:
My favorite colour is...
Blue 1
Green 2
Red
Yellow
©
If Bora than one answer applies, then circle all appropriate numbers.
A few questions have blank spaces instead of answer numbers. Just complete these in your own vords.
•2-
13-
XF YOU CWLY SPEKT TZNZ IN TOHO OR KOOTENAY KATIOMAL FARXS, FIZXSE SKIP TO -Q.IO OK PACE 10. SVXRYONE KLSE PLSASE O0MPL2TE 9U£ SMTIRE QUESTIONNAIRE.
1. Zn tb« list b«lov, plsft»« circis all thm aetivitlM and programs in vhich you particlpatad on this trip to lanf f and/or Jaapar national Parka. Plaaaa do not include activitiaa or prograat you participatad in enlv in Yoho or Kootanay national parka. Cl^^^K TO THE MAP AND CIRCLX AS MANY ITEMS AS APPLY) .
|
Sightaaaing by ear |
01 |
Bicycling |
24 |
|
|
JSightaaaing by bua |
02 |
Coifing |
25 |
|
|
Viaving Vildlifa |
03 |
Tannia |
26 |
|
|
Birdvatching |
04 |
Shopping |
27 |
|
|
Mcni eking |
05 |
Attanding Movias |
28 |
|
|
Photography |
06 |
Attanding Banff Pastival |
||
|
Of Tha Arta |
29 |
|||
|
Mountain Climbing |
07 |
|||
|
Attanding Othar Liva Thaatra/ |
||||
|
2ca Climbing |
OS |
Concarta/Art Bxhibita |
20 |
|
|
Jogging/Running |
09 |
Viaiting Nusaums/Historical |
||
|
Oiaplaya/Sitas |
21 |
|||
|
Biking/Eackpacking With yo\ir |
||||
|
Ovn Croup Or By Youraalf |
10 |
Attanding Sporting Bvanta |
22 |
|
|
Biking With A Park Natural iat |
11 |
Attanding Othar Paativala/ |
||
|
Bvanta |
23 |
|||
|
Bttanding Park Zntarprativa |
||||
|
Or Educational Programs |
12 |
Downhill Skiing |
24 |
|
|
Bttanding Couraa At Banff |
Croas Country Skiing |
25 |
||
|
Cantra |
13 |
|||
|
Skating |
26 |
|||
|
Bciantific Study And Baaaarch |
14 |
Snbvahoaing |
||
|
27 |
||||
|
yisning |
15 |
|||
|
Boraadra%m Slaigh Bidaa |
28 |
|||
|
Bvimning |
16 |
|||
|
Dog Sladding |
29 |
|||
|
^B^M*W^ 1 1 ^ S mm % ^ « 3 — Beuba Diving/Enorkalling |
17 |
|||
|
Columbia Icafiald Snocoaeh |
40 |
|||
|
Beanie Boat Toura |
IB |
|||
|
Basting/Ralaxing * |
41 |
|||
|
Othar Boating/Canoaing/ |
||||
|
Kayaking/Sailing |
19 |
Viait Viaitor Information |
||
|
Cantra |
42 |
|||
|
Bivar Bafting |
20 |
|||
|
Any Othar Activitias |
||||
|
Bailboarding/Vindaurfing |
21 |
(PIZASE WRITE IN) |
||
|
Boraabaek/TrailTiding |
22 |
|||
|
Boraadra%m Carriaga Bida |
23 |
Did Not Participata In Any
Activitiaa Or Programs 49
-3-
18-
irhich of thft attractions listod boro did you porsonally visit in th« Banf f/JAspar Paries irhils on this trip?
01 02 03
«>WKSITES
Banff Jasper Lake Louise
L^KSg IF BANFF
Bov LaXe 04
Hector Lake 05
Lake Louise 06
Lake Minnevan)ca 07
Moraine Lake . 08
Peyto Lake 09
Vermilion Lakes 10
Other Lake(s) In Banff 11
Lake(s) In Banff But Don't Know HaBe(s) 12
Lake Edith And Annette or Lac Beauvert 13
Maligne Lake 14
Medicine Lake ("Disappearing Lake") 15
Patricia And Pyramid Lakes 16
Jasper or Talbot Lakes 17
Other Lake(s) Zn Jasper 18
Lake(s) In Jasper But Don't Know Name(s) . 19
MATIQNAL PARK ATTRACTIOWS
FALLg/SPRIWgS IW BMOT Bov Palls
Upper Bot Springs Pool
Cave And Basin Hot Springs And Centennial Centre
20 31
22
Other Palls/Springs Zn Banff 23
24
Palls/Springs Zn Banff But Don't Know NaBe(s)
PALLS /SPRIHCg IH JAgPER Athabasca Palls Miette Hot Springs Punchbowl Palls Sunvapta Palls
25 26 27 28
other Palls/Springs Zn Jasper 29
Pells/Springs In Jasper But Don't Know NaBe(s) 30
CLACIERS/ICEFIELDS ZN BAKFF AHP JASPER
Athabasca Glacier 31
Columbia Icefield 32
Stutfield Glacier 33
Crovfoot Glacier 34
Dome Glacier 35
Other Glaciers/Zcef ields Zn
Banff And Jasper 36
•4-
OTHER NATURAL ATTRACTIONS
ly Wt^TT
Cascade Cardan (Banff national
Park Building) 37
Castla Mountain 38
Boodooa (Rock Bpiraa) 39
Johnston Canyon 40
Baskatchavan Rivar Crossing 41
Bkoki Vallay 42
Sgypt Laka Araa 43
OTHER NATURAL ATTRACTIONS IN JASPER
Coat Lookout 44
Kaligna Cany on/Val lay 45
Mount Edith Cavall 46
Vallay Of The Piva Lakes ^ 47
Tonguin Valley 48
Skyline Trail 49
MUSEUMS /CENTRES IN BANFF
Banff Centre Por Pine Arts 50
Banff National Park MuseuB
(Wildlife Displays) 51
Luxton MuseuB (Indian Culture) 52
natural History Museum
(Geological) 53
Walter J. Phillips Art Callery 54
Mhyte Museum Of The Canadian
Bockies (Art Displays) 55
Museius/Cantres In Banff But Don't Know MaBe(s)
tfVgEVWg/CEmEg/iy JAgPER Columbia Icefield Cantre 57 The Den Wildlife Museum 58
HISTORICAL BITES IN BANFF
JAgPEB
Bankhead Coal Mine Ghost Tovn (Banff) 59
Bilver City Plaque (Banff) 60
Banff Springs Hotel 61
Old Port Point Cairn (Jasper) 62
72
Buffalo Paddock In Banff
GONDOLA LIFTS IN BANFF
Lake Louise Gondola Lift
Mount Horquay Scenic Lift
Sulphur Mountain Gondola Lift
Sunshine Village And Gondola
gPNPQLft Ling IN JAgPER
Jasper Tramway On Whistler's Mountain
SKI RESORTS IN BANFF
Lake Louise Mount Horquay Sunshine Village
56 SKI RESORTS IN JASPER
Marmot Basin
63
64
65
66 67
68
69 70 71
72
31-
While you vere in the Parks, did you take a bus aightaeeing tour of either Banff or Jasper national Park which originated in the Parks?
(PLEASE CIRCLE ONE NUMBER ONLY)
No 1
Yes
IF YEg
b) Was that an overnight tour of the Park or was it a tour which began and ended on the sane day? (PLEASE CIRCLE ONE NUMBER ONLY) •
Overnight tour Sane day tour
-a) What are aone of the things you liked about the time you spent in Banff or Jasper National Parks? (PLEASE WRITE IN)
*b) What are some of the things you didn't like about the tine you spent in Banff or Jasper National Parks? (PLEASE WRITE IN)
3»-
AMSWER QUZSTIOW S IF YOU gpgWT Tlig IM EXNrF MATIONAL PXRK
P1«AS« indicate your level of Mtisfection with a^nff national »>rk on the folloving ettributee, using e ocele froa one to oeven, where one is very dieeetisfied and seven is very satisfied. The Bore satisfied you vere with the Perk on the sttributes shovn, the higher the nuaber you vould choose, the less satisfied you vere, the lover the nuBber you vould choose. CZRCLE OKE irUKBER rOR BACH tTATEKEKT.
1. Availability of suitable sccosBodation
3. Choice of
restaurants/food snd beverage services for you
3. nightlife, theatre And sntertainsent
14. Public vashroos facilitiss
S. Quality of food/ beverage
ۥ CoBfort and clean- liness of scconoda- tion
7« Shopping
opportunities
t. Quality of camping
9. Quality of Mrvice
Very Diseat-
lAliAil
neither Satis- fied/ Dissat-
islitfl
Very SatiS'
/ied
lO.Vildemess protection and nature conssrva-
tion 1
11 • Friend 1 iness ,
courtesy and hospi- tality of people working there
12 Overall eost
Ho
Opinion/ Does Mot ABfily
*b) In your epinon what, if anything, is special about Itnll national Park nhich makes it diffsrsnt froa other parks you havs visitsd?
VRITE 1» SELOW.
•4<
^StfTR QUESTION ft IP YOU CPEWT TTIfT TM JXSPER MATIQMXt.
-a) PlM^e indicate your Imvl of oatiofACtion vlth Ja«par nationMi »Mrk on tht folloving ottributos, Ming a ocalo trom on* to oovon, irhart one is vory dissatisfiod ond oovan it vory oitisfiod. Th« Bore •atisfiod you voro with the Fark on the attributes shown, the higher the number you %rould choose, the less satisfied you Mrs, the lover the nusber you would choose. CIRCLE ONE VUKBER POR BACH tTATKKENT.
Very Dissat'
neither Satis- fied/ Dissat- lAliSl.
Very talis-
»o
Opinion/ Does Not i^BSlX
Availability of suitable acco&Bodation
Choice of restaurants/food and beverage services for you
L Nightlife, theatre and entertainsent
Public vashrooa facilities
I. Quality of food/ beverage
I. CoBfort and clean- - liness of accoBBoda-
. tion
7. Shopping
opportunities
I. Quality of camping
I. Quality of service
lO.Vilderness protection and nature conserva- tion 1
Ll.Friendliness,
courtesy and hospi< tality of people working there
U .Overall cost
•b) In your iopinon what, if anything, is special about jragper National Park which Bakes it different fros other parka you have visited? NRITE ZN BELON.
69-
Excluding this visit, in vhat ysar vas your last visit to Banff or Jasper National Park? WRITE IN BELOW OR CHECK BOX.
YEAR
I) NEVER VISITED BEFORE THIS TIME
Plaase indicate on the list below, vhat sources of information were used to plan your trip to Banff /Jasper National Par)cs. (PLEASE CIRCLE AS KANY AS APPLY).
I received literature or infoniation before leaving on this trip from. • •
Travel Alberta 01
Tourism Canada 02
Parks Canada 03
British Columbia 04
Canadian Government Office Outside Canada (example: embassy, consulate, trade or
tourist office) 05
I received information from an information centre
yhii? pp th? trip oe
I. received information at a travel show 07
I consulted a travel agency and...
Was provided with literature 08
Was provided with other information 09
I saw a T.V. advertisement 10
I saw any other type of advertisement 11
Z saw a travel article 12
I saw a travel film 13
I read a travel book 14
Advice of friends or relatives 15
My om previous experience 16
DIDN'T USE ANY INFORMATION SOURCES 17
73
When did you Bake the final decision to visit the Banff/Jasper National Parks 8ysteiD? Please circle the number beside the Bonth and inrite in the year in the space provided.
January
February
March
01 02
03
July
August
September
07 08 09
(WRITE IN)
April 04 October 10
Kay 05 November 11
June 06 December 12
-10-
5-5
EVERYONE PLEASE ANSWER ALL REMAINING QUESTIONS. 6-2 PLEASE REFER TO THE ENCLOSED MAP TO ANSWER QUESTION 10. 13-
Pl^ase indicate where you XiX&l sntered the National ParXs on your trip.
|
Location |
1 |
(HWY |
16 |
- EAST GATE) |
1 |
|
Location |
2 |
(HWY |
16 |
- WEST GATE) |
2 |
|
Location |
3 |
(HWY |
11 |
- EAST GATE) |
3 |
|
Location |
4 |
(HWY |
1 - WEST. GATE) |
4 |
|
|
Location |
5 |
(HWY 93 |
- WEST GATE) |
5 |
|
|
Location |
6 |
(HWY |
1 - EAST GATE) |
6 |
-b) What was the date of this first entry?
L Month Day
•c) And about what tine of day did you first snter the ParXs System? -"^ Between 6 a.a. and 12 noon 1
From noon to six o'clock p.B. 2 Between 6 p.n. and Bidnight 3 ^ or From midnight to 6 a.n. 4
^ IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE CANADA, ANSWER Q.ll.
11. At what city, town or border crossing point did you anter Canada on L this current trip?
CITY/TOWN/BORDER CROSSING PROVINCE
11-
22-
ThinXing of your entire trip, including the tine you spent in the Parks, vhich one trip type defined below beet describee the kind of trip you took?
An outdoors vacation. A vacation in a natural
area where you Bay engage in activities such as
camping, fishing, hiking or rafting. 1
A resort vacation. A trip to a resort or resort area where a wide variety of activities, such as beaches, skiing, golfing, tennis and so on, are available close by or on the premises. 2
A close-to-hone leisure trip. A trip to a place close to home where you can enjoy activities such as a beach, lake, seashore, or park. 3
A touring vacation. A vacation by car or bus or train through areas of scenic beauty, cultural or general interest. 4
fi town or city trip. A trip to a town or city Where
you may shop, visit museums, enjoy entertainment,
dine, attend plays or concerts, or just stroll around
and enjoy the city. 5
A visit to friends or relatives. A trip whose
primary purpose is to visit and spend time with
friends or relatives. 6
A business or convention trip. For instance, attending
a meeting, seminar, conference or convention. 7
Which category best describes the people who made up your immediate travel party on your trip to the Parks?
A Couple 1
Family/relatives 2
Friends 3
Business Associates 4
School Group 5
Club/Association/Convention Croup 6
Senior's Group 7
By Myself 8
Other (SPECIFY)
-12-
24-
Hhich of the following Itras of oquipBtnt did you have vith you on your trip to the Par)cs? CIRCLE ALL ITEMS OF EQUIPMENT YOU HAD WITH YOU, (IP YOU DID WOT TAKE ANY OF THE LISTED EQUIPMENT WITH YOU, CHECK THIS BOX [] AND SKIP TO THE HEXT QUESTION).
|
Tent |
01 |
Fishing equipment |
13 |
|
BackpacKing equipnent |
02 |
6norkeI/scuba equipment |
14 |
|
Climbing equipment |
03 |
Coif clubs |
15 |
|
BiXing boots |
04 |
Motorired Golf Cart |
16 |
|
Field guides |
05 |
5ailboard |
17 |
|
Still camera |
06 |
Bicycle |
18 |
|
Movie camera |
07 |
Motorcycle |
19 |
|
Videotape camera |
08 |
Boat |
20 |
|
Binoculars/telescope |
09 |
Canoe/Kayak |
21 |
|
Downhill skis |
10 |
All-Terrain-Vehicle (ATV) |
22 |
|
Cross country skis |
11 |
Snowmobile |
23 |
|
Snovshoes |
12 |
other eqfuipment |
24 |
|
/SPECIFY^ : |
.i-a) Kow please think about the people in your household, regardless of whether they travelled with you on your trip to the Parks.
How Bany people, including yourself and any infants, are in your household? (WRITE IN NUMBER)
; «b) And how many, if any, are under six years old and how Bany are six " to eighteen years old inclusive? (WRITE IN NUMBERS)
HUMBER UNDER SIX YEARS OLD
■I
HUMBER 6 TO 18 YEARS INCLUSIVE ]
^ «*c) Is the Chief wage earner in the household under 45 years old or 45 years or over? (CHECK ONE BELOW)
Under 45 years 1
45 years or Bore . 2
•13-
34
-a) Finally, to halp us classify tba infonation, vould you plaase indicata imich of tha following ganaral catagoriaa bast dascribas your paraonal annual income bafora taxas and othar daductions.
(CIRCLE jai£ NUMBER ONLY AND INDICATE CURRENCY) .
|
Undar (10,000 |
1 |
|
|
$10,000 |
- $14,999 |
2 |
|
$15,000 |
- $19,999 |
3 |
|
$20,000 |
- $29,999 |
4 |
|
$30,000 |
- $39,999 |
5 |
|
$40,000 |
- $49,999 |
a |
|
$50,000 |
- $59,999 |
7 |
|
$60,000 |
- $69,999 |
8 |
|
$70,000 |
- $74,999 |
9 |
|
$75,000 |
or Bora |
0 |
CURRENCY fCIRCLE ONE> Canadian 1 U.S. 2
>b) And vould you please indicate vhich of the following general categories best describes your total household income before taxes
and other deductions CURRENCY) .
(CIRCLE NUMBER ONLY AND INDICATE
|
Under 10,000 |
1 |
||
|
$10,000 |
$14,999 |
2 |
|
|
$15,000 |
$19,999 |
3- |
|
|
$20,000 |
$29,999 |
4 |
|
|
$30,000 |
$39,999 |
5 |
|
|
$40,000 |
$49,999 |
6 |
|
|
$50,000 |
$59,999 |
7 |
|
|
$60,000 |
$69,999 |
8 |
|
|
$'0,000 |
$74,999 |
9 |
|
|
$75,000 |
or Bora |
0 |
CURRENCY fCIRCLE ONE>
Canadian 1 U.S. 2
•14-
38-
i ^ere any coBsents you vould like to add, •ither negative or positive ut the tiae you spent in the National Parks?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CO-OPERATION. PLEASE PUT YOUR COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE
ENVELOPE PROVIDED AND MAIL IT BACK TO RUSTON/TOMANY 4 ASSOCIATES THE POSTAGE IS ALREADY PAID SO YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PUT STAMPS ON THE ENVELOPE IF IT IS MAILED IN CANADA OR THE U.S.
Ruston/Tomany 4 Associates
111 Elitabeth Street, 4th Floor,
Toronto, Ontario, MSG 1P7 (Canada)
(416) 977-1533 41/44