Gauging Public Interest in Trail Central

Gauging Public Interest in Trail Central

A research report generated by University of Pittsburgh at Bradford students Ernest Benkovski, Jennifer Crowley, Ryan Crowley, Mara Kloss, Desiree’ Lamer, Lauren Marshall, Michael Morrison, Jenna Oyler, and Elizabeth Tillman.

Produced in conjunction with and on behalf of the Allegheny National Forest Visitors Bureau

December 2011

Table of Contents

Introduction1

Methodology2

Questionnaire 4

Results

Results by town6

Next steps8

Appendices10

1. Town Hall Questionnaire
2. Phone Survey

Questionnaire

1. Phone Survey

Results

1. Town Hall Transcripts

Trail Town meeting in Kane, PA (Oct. 18, 2011)

Introduction

The task of balancing industry and nature has been one of great question and difficulty, but it has been the story of Northwestern Pennsylvania for the majority of its history. On one hand, the serenity of the magnificent national Forest provides an abundance of natural resources which spark an awareness of nature, as well as calls for sustainability. On the other hand, the might of the industrial machine of oil and timber—and now shale gas exploration—often presents an image of choosing jobs over the natural environment. Appalachia has ample natural resources, in other words, but it is not always the case that they are used sustainability. As the exploitation of Pennsylvania’s natural resources is on the rise, so too are fears about the loss the unique and wonderful natural assets. While oil and shale exploration will continue, there is also a growing interest in better utilizing our natural resources for sustainable economic development, or development that balances economic, environmental, and social needs through long-term, democratic planning and decision making.One example of this strategy is ecological tourism, or “ecotourism,” that would not only protect and preserve nature but also develop a sustainable, unique, and growing local economy. We at the University of Pittsburgh at Bradford have spent the fall semester researching the potentials for ecotourism development in northwestern Pennsylvania by collaborating with the Allegheny National Forest Visitors Bureau and their strategic plan for implementing “Trail Central, ” which is a program that looks to utilize an existing network of multi-use nature trails to diversify the regional economy and create non-exportable jobs on the basis of ecotourism. This report is a cumulative outcome of a vast quantity of intricate participatory research, conducted by the research team lead by Dr. William Schumann, in efforts to propose new reinvigoration in immense assets that exist as gold mines to economic and community expansion. It is, and remains our goal to spread consciousness and education about the connection between the cultural and natural grandeur of this area, and its implementation as a direct and indirect method to the proliferation, development, and refreshment of the local economy, standard of living, and aesthetic splendidness. Our key focus was to work alongside local community members to expose the opportunities hidden within one’s own town or city. Meeting with various local towns, organizations, citizens, business owners, etc. the sense of productivity emerged quite immediately as the most significant facet and ideal of our research shown itself through open discourse: unique, original, and vast cultural/local richness. This asset ascended out and asserted to the local communities something that was known but was not recognized often, and the discussions seemed to take a impressive contour as the guidelines for their own success were drawn out on the table. Through crucial and extremely beneficial partnership efforts with the Allegheny National Forest Visitors Bureau, and the helpful guidance and assistance of the Executive Director, Linda Devlin, the research team was able to extend and create a variety of town hall style meetings to study a wide range of potential areas. Though some communities indicate a stable standing in terms of economy and social well-being, the widely held areas exhibited some ample need in varied economic boosts[1]( see Appendix, Northstar report). Following the same line of pattern identification, our research indicated a multitude of interesting numbers regarding the vast number of tourists that visit the communities and areas[2] (See Appendix). After careful observation, long and crucial analysis, hours of discussion, the report was finally constructed to display the findings of our attentive work, and the numbers and final outcomes showed a surprising and very interesting illustration, exemplifying itself as a must read for the capacity analysis of the regions.

Methodology

We designed a method of research that would best gauge and inquire about public attitudes and emotion of various implementations of trails, Geotourism, and various other sustainable methods of economic development for the region. We focused on four towns in the Northwestern PA region for our research design: Kane, PA; Bradford, PA; Smethport, PA; and Warren, PA. The overall sample size for our research was n=93. To meet the research goal we decided not only to devise a questionnaire, but also to hold community based meetings within the towns we were including in the study. This allowed for a more complete and personal understanding of public attitude and concerns alongside a formal questionnaire that enabled data analysis.

Our research looked into various elements and factors of Geotourism and the integration of such concepts into the region. Each town that we travelled to, we performed a presentation summarizing and defining the concept and properties involved with the creation of a trail town, the implementation of Geotourism, and its benefits and impacts on the local environment and natural resources in their area. After this we proceeded to engage the audience with a set of discussion questions that sparked a discourse enabling the team to identify and clarify awareness of Geotourism. From questions of asset identification, to questions about roles of local businesses in the development process, community members got a chance to open up the discussion and identify various pros and cons, issues and questions, and overall attitudes toward Geotourism, Trail central, and the idea of a trail based economy. The bringing together of community members enabled an awareness of others in the area that were already working towards projects and thus encouraged meeting of groups and cooperative efforts of others towards projects, thus increasing overall drive toward the cause of the project. Towards the end of our meetings, we handed out a questionnaire based survey that would serve as a form of qualitative data analysis, looking into and identifying attitudinal patterns as well as major resources and important asset information. The analysis and coding of this data assisted in identifying and tracing patterns throughout all the studied towns, categorizing major assets and factors that the communities recognized in their respective towns.

We also engaged in phone surveys of successful trail towns, including Damascus, VA and Frostburg, MD, interviewing groups and organizations that were pivotal in the advancement and overall achievement of the sustainable trail town model. The phone interviews were gauged for local government, city administrators and managers, and successful business owners. With these interviews we asked questions that would help us get a better understanding of how there successful trail towns started, advertised, gathered community support, and was able to draw the trail users into their town. These surveys will be used for supporting data from our findings with the town hall meetings and questionnaires.

Overview of Results

To determine the readiness for trail town development, we first developed guidelines for judging the capacity of towns incorporated in our study. Much of the criteria for capacity were gathered from previous studies on trail town development and phone surveys conducted with successful trail towns.

A key component of our capacity analysis was the amount of resources that already existed within the communities. This includes active local organizations and natural and historic resources closely located to or within the towns. This information was also gained through survey data results, as well as discussion responses, pertaining to the assets within the communities, gathered during a series of town hall style meetings held in four towns within the study area.

Another important asset for development is the amount of hospitality resources, lodging and restaurants, available to tourists in these towns. This also included the existence of facilities such as equipment rentals sites, public restrooms, and campgrounds. Also noted were features within the community such as bike racks outside of restaurants and opportunities for guests to store recreational sports equipment.

The attitude of the community towards trail town development can also have a large impact on its success. To determine public opinion we observed and recorded the responses of members of local governments and organizations who attended our meetings, along with the opinions of the public to judge this willingness for development. This information was obtained through survey questionnaire results and statements made in public meetings.

In our study, the majority of our questions were open, to avoid directing statements or thoughts when discussing the assets or needs of communities. We used a few closed questions to determine trail use, and a series of Likert scale questions to determine personal support for trail development, as well as gathering individual opinions on the communities’ level of support.

Results – Town Hall Meeting Survey and Discussion Data

Overview

Within the entire population of participants, the personal trail use of the participants of the different communities varied slightly. In Warren, over 70% of the participants said that they used their existing trails at least twice a month or more; in Bradford this percentage was roughly 55%. However, Smethport residents are currently using their trials somewhat less, the majority, using trails 6-10 times a year or less. Over 20% of Kane residents stated that they never use the trails, yet almost 40% of all participants of that town stated that they used the trails twice a month or more. These individual community statistical percentages must be also associated with the age, and occupation of the participants as well as the current level of trail use in the surveyed communities. However, almost 50% of the combined populations stated that they used the trails 2 times a month or more, and 88% noted hiking as one of their common trail activities. The majority of participants in all of the meetings were male, and the average age was around 50 years old. However, the average age for Warren was 44 years, and the average for Bradford was 52 years. This could be strongly related to the higher percentage of trail use in those communities. The average age for residents of Kane was 49 years, while Smethport’s population averaged to 54 years.

Resources in Place

When observing the natural assets of the communities, we found that 36% of the people who completed the questionnaire saw their local water bodies to be one of their most important current assets for trail down development. 89% of Bradford participants and 95% of Warren participants mentioned the value of their local waterways, ponds, and lakes, along with 69% of Kane and 67% of Smethport. Nearly a quarter of Bradford, Smethport, and Kane/Mt.Jewittt participants cited wildlife as another of their communities’ assets. 45% of Warren and 19% of all participants acknowledged their communities’ woodlands and their current trails, while 18% also recognized the value of the areas diverse weather and beautiful fall foliage as an asset to development.

For historical assets, 37% of the participants recognized local historical museums and their historical downtown centers as an asset existing in their community. 64% of Smethport participants recognized the value of their historic downtown area which includes a mansion district.31% of overall participants mentioned specifically the historical value of oil-related sites, Bradford’s oil-rich history including an oil museum was referred to by 75% of respondents. while 27% mentioned their timber heritage. Historical architecture—cited by 46% of Kane/Mt. Jewitt responses— closely related to historical downtown, was mentioned by 25% of all survey takers . Historical businesses and farms were both recognized by 16% of the participants.

Social resources that currently exist were also mentioned in our questionnaires and discussions. 44% mentioned multiple local clubs and associations that existed in the community that could help support trail down development, while 28% of the participants noted existing local trail associations specifically. Trail associations were more heavily recognized in Bradford, with 67% of responses than in Smethport and Warren with 31% and 38% respectively. Youth organizations and successful school-related events were also acknowledged by 12% and 8%, respectively with 35% of Bradford, 25% of Kane/Mt.Jewett, and 48% of Warren respondents identifying social capacity in their youth population.

Resources Lacking

During our focus group discussions, we encouraged the participants to develop their own criteria for what they considered to be essential to trail develop development. Collectively, roughly 60% felt that they had restaurants and specialty stores that would appeal to a tourist population. But, almost 45% of the Kane surveys mentioned a need for more restaurants in their community, as well as over 25% of the Bradford and Smethport surveys. Also, roughly 30% of combined participants believed that they had the hotels and bed and breakfasts in place to provide housing to future tourists; this need was mentioned by over 50% of the Warren, Kane, and Smethport survey responses. Also, 35% of all participants acknowledged a need for more businesses in their downtown communities. Over 50% of Smethport participants specifically mentioned the need for businesses, as well as 40% of the Warren surveys. 15% of the participants from all of the communities mentioned a need for outfitters stores in particular.

25% of the survey respondents, collectively, felt that more advertising was necessary to promote the area. This was strongly noted by over 50% of the Bradford and Warren populations. Almost 20% felt that expanding the community’s internet resources could help support this need. 20% also mentioned the need for partnerships within the community to promote cooperative development, between businesses, organizations, and local government. In Warren, 60% of the survey responses mentioned a need for local partnerships, while slightly over 20% of Kane and Bradford participants acknowledged this need as well. Expanding public transportation services and increasing the number of local festivals and events was almost acknowledged.

Public Opinion

As previously stated, personal and community support is an important component to trail town development. Support was determined using a Likert scale ranging from 1-10; 1 as the lowest and 10 as the highest level of support. Participants documented what they believed to be their own personal level of support, as well as what they perceived to be the level of their respective communities’ support for trail town development. Overall, the average rating for personal support was 8.71. Bradford had the highest average of support, 9.43, but the averages for all participating towns were over 8.11. The amount of estimated community support, including all participants, averaged out to 6.92. The highest average for community support was in Bradford as well, 7.90, and the lowest was in Kane, averaging out to 6. Warren’s average for community support was 6.92 and the Smethport average came to 6.89.

Graphs/Chart

Conclusions

With resource extraction jobs already have been in this area in massive presence, we know that its economic impacts are not permanent. We aren’t trying to say that Bradford, Smethport, Kane and Warren should choose Geotourism over extraction industry jobs, but we are recommending the two co-exist. We are hoping the Trail Central concept will give citizens in these communities more opportunities for economic sustainability. We will know how successful the project is when we are able to measure for benchmarks of sustainability. Charting new business creation, new job creation, new project and grant creation as well as revenue changes in already existing businesses will help to better understand if Trail Central is achieving economic growth. Communities and organizations can use relatively low-cost online surveys as a means of gathering information about community, consumer and business interests. Community organization is going to be the key to the success of these projects. A growth in the number of community organizations related to trail towns will be the ultimate benchmark for the project’s success as social-capital can be one of the most powerful assets any community has. The power of organized people with a goal is a force that won’t be stopped if the communities choose to embrace the identity together. There is no finish line or guarantees in our plan, and there is no blueprint drawn up for success to follow. The ultimate goal is for communities to actively seek economic growth using the resources they already have available to them. Northwestern Pennsylvania’s natural beauty is a resource that can’t be extracted. With the economic history of this area, we can’t look to the same resources time and time again in hopes of sustainability. We also can’t wait for a major corporation to open a company in our communities in order for jobs to appear. We have the resources in front of us to seek out economic sustainability on our own. We recognize both the opportunities for and limits of geotourism as a means of supporting local Appalachian economies and communities; however, we hope to use this as a stepping stone of information to support grant writing and further research to identify and develop assets in McKean and Warren counties.

Addition to the conclusion:

Using the collection of information that we were able to gather as a result of the collaboration of our own empirical data that we collected and the wisdom of other successful trail towns in the Appalachian region, we will then in the future hopefully be able to come up with a comprehensive plan to go about making our project bear fruit. We have laid the ground work. As you saw, the resulting interest in the idea of the development of a trail town and geo-tourism as a possible long term sustainable economic plan, while varying in prospect and scope amongst the different towns from which we collected our data, at least generated some invaluable thought and interest. It is our hope that we are able to capitalize on some of the momentum that we have created. It is our firm belief that the creation of a truly citizen based, participatory, sustainable trail town economy is a viable option for people in this area. Geo-tourism is something that not only cannot be irresponsibly exploited and outsourced, resulting in the deathly boom and bust economics that have plagued this area and other parts of the country, the Appalachian region in particular, but that also solves some of the issues of public skepticism and attitude. This grass roots approach, with the aid and support of their local governments, to the development of a trail town will give people in this region a greater sense of ownership and caring of their land and region because their hard work would be directly responsible for helping to make their towns a destination that people want to come and visit. The natural beauty of this area is too great for it not be shared. We make these claims to say, that it is our belief that Mother Nature can be used as a means of creating a descent lively hood in a way that protects her and cherishes her all at the same time. Geo-tourism, and the development of a trail based economy, we believe, is one of the best ways of accomplishing this goal. Our hope, as Pitt Students, is to help facilitate this transition in the best ways that we can. This project has laid a solid foundation and the pillars of sustainable economic growth are ready to be put into place. Here are some of the future steps that we think should be taken to help make this a reality: ……