Focus groups improve wilderness management efforts - 300 Collective Years of Experience

When considering the grandeur of mountain peaks, pristine running streams, deserts devoid of humans, and the serenity and beauty these special places hold for so many, selecting a trendy marketing strategy to improve the management of these areas is probably the last thing that comes to mind. However, managers have a tool at their fingertips that holds great promise for improving park and natural resource management as well as the quality of visitor experience.

Over the past several decades, focus groups have been used primarily for private sector marketing purposes. More recently, they are being employed to address issues in natural resource management (Winter, Palucki & Burkhardt, 1999). Focus groups function under the following assumption: people have attitudes and perceptions about their environment that are often influenced by interactions with other people (Krueger, 1998). Although these attitudes and perceptions are both personal and strongly held, Albrecht (1993) suggests that a number of group members realize that their opinions are often reconstructed as a result of what they hear from others within the focus group.

The Old Way

Wilderness research has historically been conducted using surveys, questionnaires and onsite interviews in attempts to examine visitor perceptions and opinions. These efforts have focused attention on visitor attitudes and opinions toward managers, how visitor experience is influenced by visitor perceptions of environmental conditions, and how visitors and managers perceive the resource differently.

While most wilderness studies have employed questionnaires and interviews to identify wilderness visitors' attitudes and perceptions about the site they are visiting, and how onsite experiences influence their opinions of managers, few have used focus groups (Flood, 1999). Yet data provided by focus groups can accurately predict visitor expectations of onsite conditions and management practices, which in turn, can help resource managers develop successful strategies to maintain quality (Absher, McAvoy, Burdge & Gramann, 1988). Understanding the motivations and expectations of visitors is key to determining whether onsite conditions match the desired outcomes. Focus groups help managers to better understand visitor perceptions of the ecological resources, dimensions of human experience and the types of management actions visitors observe. The information gained through focus group interviews helps resource managers develop and market better management strategies.

Case Study: Flathead Focus Group

Although previously collected quantitative measures provide insight to a specific set of questions, they don't explain why visitors have these perceptions, or how they "truly" feel. After an exhaustive examination of past research, focus groups don't seem to have been used to gauge wilderness visitors. Consequently, it was concluded that assembling a group of long-time visitors for a focus group could potentially lend a contextual richness to the study and provide valuable insights for site managers.

It is not uncommon to find long-term repeat visitors. These "best customers" are a great base for a focus group. That's the core group used in a case study conducted in the Mission Mountains Wilderness (MMW) in the Flathead National Forest in western Montana. Here eight visitors with 20 or more years experience visiting the area were asked to participate in a focus group to share both their perceptions of management actions and their opinions of managers (Flood, 2001). Collectively, this group provided a rich history, addressing both the use of the area and their opinions about the management of the Mission Mountains Wilderness. These long-time visitors possessed incredible insights, knowledge, information and very strong feelings about the area.

Effective Use of Visitor Focus Groups

In the case of Mission Mountains Wilderness, the goal was to learn how heavily damaged wilderness campsites, and subsequent management actions implemented to address those impacts, had influenced the quality of visitor experience and their opinions of the site managers. Long-time visitors were targeted in the focus group because they had visited the park prior to any restoration activities, plus during the restoration. This group was able to reflect on how changes in campsite conditions, and the efforts by managers to restore them, had influenced their experiences. Although individuals participating in the focus group were not randomly selected, most participants did not know each other and came from different backgrounds and viewpoints representing hikers, horse users, campers, anglers, hunters and wildlife viewers. Collectively, the eight longtime visitors had been visiting the Mission Mountains Wilderness for nearly 300 years.

When developing focus group questions, base the questions on desired outcomes. For example, in the Mission Mountains Wilderness case study, the following questions (Flood, 2001) were sent to the members two weeks prior to the focus group session: (1) Why do you visit the Mission Mountains Wilderness? (2) Over the years since you first visited, has the condition of campsites and the wilderness changed? If so, in what way? (3) From your perspective, what are the benefits of the restoration program? (4) From your perspective, what are the limitations of the restoration program? (5) What suggestions do have about the campsite restoration program or how would you improve it? (6) In order for a successful restoration program to be implemented, what are the most important suggestions you can make for the future of wilderness?

What you Learn from a Focus Group

Although Kruger (1999) recommends that facilitating multiple focus groups provides information with a higher degree of reliability, only one group was used for this study.

Focus groups can be effectively used in combination with other data collection methods to find significant correlations (Flood, 2001). Long-time visitors shared the following reasons for visiting the Mission Mountains Wilderness: "To find a sense of peace and tranquility;" wildness, independence and solitude;" "teach my girls about an outdoor lifestyle and for healing;" "to experience wildness and solitude;" "passion for wilderness and for wildness, and to hike and fish."

Overall, the focus group members agreed that the impact they observed at campsites had generally decreased over the past 20 years. They indicated that reduced impacts were especially evident at day-use areas where overnight camping had been restricted over the past 20 years, and where heavily impacted campsites have been receiving active restoration.

Regarding the condition of the wilderness, the focus group members shared these comments: "There is more use than there used to be, the quantities of people seem different and there is less wilderness expertise;" "I was taught to have sensitivity for the wilderness and I don't like phones in wilderness;" "A huge change is coming and without restoration something will be lost;" "Solitude is important and there should be a reduced limit of no more than four people per group;" "When there are fewer visitors, I have a greater desire to go by myself." One member said it best when he stated, "how to best manage wilderness is a complicated problem."

Although some focus group members were more accepting of impacts at some heavily used sites than others, they were all very concerned about potential trail improvements and how these improvements would make remote access easier. Overwhelmingly, focus group members felt that restoration encompassed far more than restoring impacted campsites; it also served as an important tool to educate visitors.

Several focus group members were also concerned about visitors being displaced to other areas due to restoration activities. They were equally concerned about the time restoration takes and the money devoted to it. Because members indicated that throughout the summer they often visit at least once a week, they had a much higher daily presence in the wilderness than managers. Members felt that most people respected the closed areas and through observing the restoration process they could tell that people cared about the resource. In contrast, when visitors observed that nothing was being done to address impacts, they felt no one cared. But, they also felt some limits might have to be set on how much campsite restoration can be implemented, so that when it does occur, it is done well and is properly monitored over time to ensure success.

The group overwhelmingly felt that educating users before they go into the wilderness is paramount. This suggests that people's experience prior to visiting wilderness, in the absence of reference points, may result in a failure to notice restoration. However, when visitors go to the wilderness for their first visit, and are informed in advance about impacted campsites being restored, they respond by saying that restoration is good. Focus group members indicated that people who go into wilderness do not go away with a negative impression due to having observed restoration activities. Instead, they felt visitors went away with positive memories knowing that people are working hard to preserve a wild place and that the impacted areas will be restored for future generations to enjoy.

The biggest concern for many wilderness managers, as well as the long-time visitors, is that first-time visitors may become conditioned to accepting impacted areas as the norm, while others may see them merely as distractions. Several group members shared this concern: because those who reside in urban areas are used to seeing roads, power-lines and houses everywhere around them, when they visit a wilderness and see impacted campsites they assume this is normal and they do not realize that wilderness should be untrammeled.

Focus Groups Work

Although the use of focus groups to assist managers in developing management solutions is in its infancy, providing a forum for participants to share insights, knowledge and love of the outdoors can only make management efforts both more effective and more acceptable to the public. In this case, it was found that the long-time visitors had nearly the same observations and concerns as managers, yet had not been included as part of the process. The detailed descriptions and concerns visitors possess about our natural resources can provide important lessons about the past and the present. They serve as clues to the future of effective management -- that is, if managers take the time to ask visitors to assist them in achieving management goals.

It took nearly 20 years to realize that an unutilized tool for addressing resource problems facing managers was at our fingertips--with nearly 300 collective years of insight and wisdom. Long-time visitors can help guide management actions to enhance quality visitor experiences.

RESEARCH INTO ACTION: USING FOCUS GROUPS TO ASSIST MANAGERS

Visitors have the potential to provide valuable information about facilities, parks and wilderness areas to managers. Regardless of whether the recreation manager is newly hired or a veteran, asking visitors to share their perspectives on an area, their opinions of the management, and their vision for the future can help managers to better meet everyone's goals. Using focus groups can be an inexpensive and time-effective method to understand how visitors define what they see as concerns or problems as well as their opinions of the managers. Research indicates that the use of focus groups, in combination with surveys and interviews, is a useful tool in the effort to improve the management of recreation areas.

What managers need to know. First, develop a set of questions that address specific concerns, conflicts, and issues that will provide a better understanding of visitor perceptions (past, present and future) as well as their opinions of managers.

Identify potential focus group members. Ask agency staff to provide a list of potential focus group members. Lists should reflect specific interest groups with an equal number of male and female participants.

Select key individuals from homogeneous visitor groups. For each group bring in individuals with similar interests or perspectives. These are not meant to be debate sessions.

Contact members. Personally contact every member and send them an invitation to attend the focus group, include a map to the location (if needed) and a set of questions you would like them to think about prior to the meeting. Consent forms are used primarily for three purposes: to present the goals of the focus group; to get permission both to record the session and to use their statements for research purposes; and to ensure that participants' names and identities will remain anonymous.

Facilitation, Select a group facilitator who is objective and preferably not an agency employee. The facilitator will clearly articulate the rules to the members as to their treatment of each other and how the facilitator will conduct the meeting. It is important to emphasize that the role of the agency representative is confined to primarily an information provider, and to clarify issues about agency policy when needed. The agency representative should be an observer who explains the agency position from a historical perspective and helps members understand how and why decisions have been made to achieve specific goals.

Who should attend the focus group? The facilitator, eight to 10 group members, a recorder (to ensure that the session is recorded on tape and that key points are written down), and an agency representative.

Procedure. Limit the group meeting to ninety minutes, At the end of the session, the facilitator will summarize the session, ask if there are any questions and thank the participants for their time. In some cases, participants are offered refreshments and a meal, as well as reimbursement for their time or travel.

Follow-up. Participants should receive both an official written thank you from the agency and a copy of the final research document or executive summary produced as a result of their participation.

If you are interested in using focus groups see Kruger's books on focus groups for further information, and the Web site www.focusgroups.com.

What Makes a Focus Group?

It involves people

It is assembled in a series of groups

It generally is homogeneous

It provides data

It is qualitative in nature

It focuses on discussion

References

Absher, J. D., McAvoy, L. H., Burdge, R. J., & Gramann, J. H. (1988). Public and commercial managers predicting recreationists' opinions. Journal of Park and Leisure Administration, 6 (3): 67-77.

Albrecht, T. L. (1993). Understanding communication processes in focus groups. (as cited in David L. Morgan Ed). Successful focus groups (pp.51-64). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Cole, D, N., Watson, A. E., Hall, T. E., & Spildie, D. R. (1997). High-use destinations in wilderness: Social and biophysical impacts, visitor responses, and management options. (Gen. Tech. Rep. INT- RP-496). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Flood, J. P. (1999). The influence of site restoration programs on wilderness visitor experience and visitor opinions of managers. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Flood, J. P. (2001). The effectiveness of wilderness restoration: perceptions of visitors and managers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Krueger, R. A. (1998). Analyzing and reporting focus group results. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Shindler, B., & Shelby, B. (1993). Regulating wilderness use: An investigation of user group support. Journal of Forestry, 1: 41-44.

Winter, P. L., Palucki, L. J. & Burkhardt, R. L. (1999). Anticipated responses to a fee program: the key is trust. Journal of Leisure Research, 31(3) 207-226.

RELATED ARTICLE: The best insights from the mission mountains wilderness focus group.

Long-time visitors know, see and care about the management of the Mission Mountains Wilderness.

Long-time visitors possess a rich source of historical and contemporary information about the area and its visitors.

Long-time visitors are much more than mere users of the wilderness resource, they are passionate and care about management actions.

Long-time visitors often do not fully understand many of the management actions they observe, and want to learn more about why such actions are being taken.

Flood, J. P. (2001). The effectiveness of wilderness restoration: perceptions of visitors and managers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Dr. Flood's experience as manager, restorationist and researcher provides a unique three-way perspective. His research and conclusions based on work with focus groups offers recreation managers a unique approach to improving management in an era of decreasing budgets.

COPYRIGHT 2002 National Recreation and Park Association
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group