Swatting litter bugs: what agencies can do to decrease depreciative visitor behavior.

Among various types of visitor impacts to natural and cultural resources are those caused by litter bugs and other depreciative visitor behavior, whose activity continues to strain meager park management budgets (See Reid, 2000, in the list of references on pp. 21-22). These visitor behavior-caused impacts, such as littering, illegal collection, creating social trails and not picking up after pets, are of significant management concern because they cause damage to resources, compromise the enjoyment of other visitors and incur management/ maintenance costs. With increasing participation in outdoor recreation, this problem is likely to intensify.

Researchers and managers have implemented a host of direct and indirect management actions to tackle impacts caused by depreciative visitor behaviors (Roggenbuck, 1992). Persuasive communication, education and related indirect management techniques have often been preferred, because they don't infringe upon visitors' freedom and are often considered more cost-effective than direct actions such as regulations and law enforcement (Hendee & Dawson, 2002).

Written appeals posted on signs are the persuasive communication technique most commonly used by park and recreation management agencies, even though other types of media--such as computers, the Internet and television--are increasingly used as well (Doucette & Cole, 1993; Manning, 2003). While many studies have evaluated the effectiveness of written appeals, only a small number are directly linked to visitor-impact management issues. Collectively, these studies have investigated the attractiveness of and ability to capture attention from written appeals, visitor preferences of appeals, knowledge gained, and attitude and behavior change.

Getting Visitors' Attention

According to persuasive communication research, sources, message, channel and receiver are the four factors that influence the effectiveness of the communication process (Knopf & Dustin, 1992). Therefore, the first challenge of minimum-impact education for visitors is to get the visitor's attention focused on written appeals. In 1998, Cole evaluated several ways of gaining visitor attention through trailside bulletin boards. Attention was accomplished by applying a simple written appeal asking for visitors' attention. Based on this simple appeal, one of five elaborate appeals was added to test its relative effectiveness. Three of these additional appeals attempted to increase the personal relevance of messages while the other two attributed the messages to credible or likable sources. The results showed that the simple appeal for attention alone was found to increase by 88 percent the amount of time that visitors spent reading the messages, although the use of elaborate appeals didn't improve effectiveness (Cole, 1998).

In Montana's Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, Cole, Hammond and McCool conducted a study in 1997 using an attractant strategy, in which a map of the area (the attractant) was placed next to a series of low-impact messages. While this strategy didn't attract significantly more visitors to the messages, it did increase the amount of time that visitors spent at the bulletin board.

The communications potential of bulletin boards could be improved by using better design techniques, as stated in a 1984 study by Peine, Walker, Motts and Hammitt. In their study, a bulletin board, was arranged in disarray for half a summer, and then redesigned in a contrasting and orderly manner for the rest of the summer. Although the new design didn't attract a significantly greater number of people to the bulletin board, visitors did spend less time at the board while processing the new information. This finding implied that organization of information is important for efficient visitor communication, as visitors have a limited amount of time to absorb a variety of information (e.g., park orientation, safety, regulations) and additional information (e.g., interpretive material and minimum-impact recreation guidelines).

In a recent, front-country Leave No Trace (LNT) outdoor ethics program study conducted in Durango, Colo., Leung and Attarian compared the attractiveness of a graphic-rich poster design to a traditional federal agency design. Results suggested visitors were just as likely to stop and read the traditional poster as they were the graphic-rich poster. The attachment of a brochure box to the graphic-rich poster did, however; increase its attraction to visitors.

Understanding Visitor Preferences

Few studies have investigated visitors' preferences of signs and written messages. Visitors' preferences of messages and signs could be a good indication of what actually works in the field and might help in refining what's already known. It's a step that's often overlooked in park and recreation literature.

For instance, Moore conducted a study in 1995 to find visitors' preferences for different message appeals used to affects visitor trail-use behavior. Trail visitors were shown six sets of three signs--a regulatory, polite regulatory and behavioral/environmental sign. Visitors were asked to choose one sign from each set that they thought would influence their behavior. Only 13 percent of visitors chose the regulatory sign. The majority of the visitors showed strong support for the behavioral/environmental signage.

As part of the Durango study, Wirsching examined visitors' preference for two LNT poster designs--a graphic-rich and a traditional design. Most visitors preferred the graphic-rich poster for all design elements except for "authority," for which most visitors preferred the traditional poster design. These findings suggest that if the peripheral route of persuasion (Roggenbuck 1992) is used to change visitor behavior in front-country areas, then the traditional poster with its authoritative look would be useful. However, the modern poster would be a more non threatening approach, especially if written appeals are used to reduce depreciative behaviors through application of outdoor ethics.

In 2000, Winter, Sagarin, Rhoads, Barrett and Cialdini compared prescriptive versus proscriptive messages in a survey to determine which one was perceived to be more effective in wildland and urban areas. A prescriptive message urges recreationists toward a behavior whereas a proscriptive message urges ones against it. Results of a survey on professional practitioners suggested that respondents preferred prescriptive messages and rated them as more effective in wildland and urban settings.

Education is Key

One important purpose of signs and written appeals is to transfer knowledge to receivers to influence their attitudes and behavior. The research findings in this area are mixed. In 1999, Jones evaluated visitor knowledge of LNT principles between those who were aware of the program and those who weren't. Signs, posters and brochures containing LNT information were used at trailheads and through programs. Results indicated that 57 percent of visitors who had heard of the program correctly answered four or five knowledge questions, compared to 37 percent of visitors who weren't familiar with the programs. Similar results were found in a 1986 study conducted by Dowell and McCool, who evaluated low-impact education messages. In this study, Boy Scouts were found to have increased knowledge on a post-test after being shown a booklet and slide show about LNT practices. Knowledge levels were again tested a month following completion of the program, and revealed that intervention and scores had significantly decreased, although they were still above pre-test scores. This finding suggests a need to reinforce newly acquired information.

On the other hand, Leung and Attarian recently reported only a slight increase in visitor knowledge when visitors were surveyed four to six weeks after they had been exposed to trailside LNT signs on resource impact topics. A small increase in visitor knowledge was also found with trailside interpretive signs in an Australia ecotourism setting (Hughes, & Morrison-Saunders, 2002).

Effective Signs and Behavior Modification 

The ultimate purpose of most signs and written appeals is to influence the receivers' behavior (Knopf, & Dustin, 1992). Studies that evaluate the effectiveness of how written messages change attitudes and behavior are prevalent in the park and recreation literature as well as in other disciplines.

Hockett recently conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of fear and moral written appeals designed to reduce deer feeding by visitors.

Changes in visitor attitudes and behavior were measured as a result of reading signs placed on picnic tables. The fear appeal significantly changed attitudes about the risks to people from feeding deer. Even though there was an attitude change, the moral appeal reduced the amount of deer feeding behavior to 25 percent, whereas the fear appeal reduced the behavior to only 39 percent from the control rate of 63 percent.

In some situations, the type of message may not be the overriding factor in changing visitor behavior. For instance, Molitor attempted to educate visitors on increasing the amount of noise they make while in grizzly bear country resulting in minimized human-wildlife conflicts. Findings suggested that when written information was provided to recreationists, they significantly increased their noise levels. However different types of messages tested in thin study didn't show any significant difference.

In 2000, Widner and Roggenbuck evaluated an intervention technique designed to reduce petrified wood theft at Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona. They determined that having a uniformed volunteer stand guard was the most effective method, but interpretive signs were almost as effective. More recently, Jacobi reported a multi-year effort in Acadia National Park in Maine to control depreciative visitor behaviors associated with cairns. Such behaviors included dismantling official cairns, building unofficial cairns and creating rock art. These negative behaviors resulted in ground disturbance, soil erosion and visitor safety concerns. To educate visitors to minimize their disturbance of cairns, a variety of approaches were adopted, including written appeals on signs. A study monitoring cairns wan conducted to evaluate this educational effort and revealed that visitor education resulted in only a modest increase in visitor compliance (Jacobi, 2003).

Two earlier studies in Washington also provided insights on the effectiveness of sanction signs. Martin found that the use of sanction sign and other signage reduced visitor removal of pumice at Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument. In Mount Rainier National Park, Swearingen and Johnson compared six types of trail signs for reducing off-trail hiking behavior. Trailside signs significantly reduced off-trail hiking in comparison to no-signs; the threatened-sanction signs were more effective in keeping visitors on trails.

More Research is Needed

Overall, research suggests that signs and written appeals are somewhat effective, but they aren't as effective as we would hope. How written appeals can be more effective as wall as understanding the limits of written appeals warrants more research attention.

Generally speaking, the amount of research evaluating the effectiveness of minimum-impact educational signs isn't commensurate with the level of problems in parks and protected areas. In addition, there needs to be more research conducted in front-country areas, as previous studies have been conducted primarily in backcountry and wilderness environments (Reid, 2000). As reflected by this review, a number of evaluative studies have been conducted on knowledge transfer and attitude of behavior change, but relatively few studies have examined visitors' attraction to and preferences for minimum-impact educational signs. More attention to this research theme, particularly focusing on the less-researched topics, provides hope that the problem of depreciative visitor behaviors and associated resource impacts will be under control, and environmentally sustainable visitor use in our parks and protected areas will become a reality.

RESEARCH INTO ACTION: THE EFFECTS OF SIGNS

Resource' managers use a variety of direct and indirect techniques to manage visitor behaviors. Persuasive communication, education and related indirect or "light-handed" approaches are often preferred methods to reduce depreciative visit, or behaviors: These methods are favored over direct management techniques, such as law enforcement, which tends to control visitor behavior. Light-handed management techniques implemented to increase minimum, impact visitor behaviors can be cost effective. They emphasize the modification of behavior while maintaining individual choice and freedom, an important quality of the recreation experience.

The current research investigating the effectiveness of signs and other written appeals can provide park managers with a set of guidelines to consider when developing an inexpensive and effective visitor communication and education systems. Park managers can apply this research by focusing on the following areas:

* Get the visitor's attention by using an attractant. Far example, a map of the area the visitor is about to enter.

* Bulletin boards can be improved by incorporating creative designs. When using a graphic-rich poster, attach brochures to increase attention and interest.

* Signs focusing on behavioral and/or environmental messages are preferred by visitors.

* Managers should consider an authoritative sign design when attempting to convey rules and regulations.

* Follow-up is needed to reinforce Leave No Trace (LNT) knowledge.

* Fear and moral written appeals have been shown to be effective in reducing certain types of behaviors.

* Written messages may be the most effective approach to gain visitor compliance and change behavior.

* Combinations of techniques have been shown to be effective. For example, a combination of brochures and personal contacts.

References

Cole, D. N. (1998). Written appeals for attention to low-impact messages on wilderness trailside bulletin boards: Experimental evaluations of effectiveness. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration (pp. 65-79).

Cole, D. N., Hammond, T. P., & McCool, S. F. (1997). Information quantity and communication effectiveness: Low impact messages on wilderness trailside bulletin boards. Leisure Sciences (pp. 59-72).

Doucette, J. E., & Cole, D. N. (1993). Wilderness Visitor Education: Information about Alternative Techniques. General Technical Report INT-295. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Dowell, D. L, & McCool, S. F. (1986), Evaluation of a wilderness Information dissemination program. In: Lucas, R. C., comp. Proceedings-National Wilderness Research Conference: Current Research (pp. 494-500). General Technical Report INT-212. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Hendee, J. C., & Dawson, C. P. (2002). Wilderness Management: Stewardship and Protection of Resources and Values (3rd Ed.). Golden, CO: Fulcrum Press.

Hockett, K. S. (2000). The Effectiveness of two Interventions on Reducing Deer Feeding Behavior by Park Visitors. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Hughes, M., & Morrison-Saunders, A. (2002). Impact of trail-side interpretive signs on visitor knowledge. Journal of Ecotourism (pp. 122-132)

Jacobi, C. (2003). Leave the rocks for the next glacier. International Journal of Wilderness (pp. 30-31).

Jones, M. (1999). Leave No Trace: Pilot Study Report. Boulder. CO: The City of Boulder Open Space and Mountains Parks.

Knopf, R. C., & Dustin, D. L. (1992). A multidisciplinary model for managing vandalism and depreciative behavior in recreation settings. In: Manfredo, M. J., ed. Influencing Human Behavior: Theory and Applications in Recreation, Tourism, and Natural Resources Management (pp. 209-261).

Leung, Y-F., & Attarian, A. (2003). Frontcountry visitor information/education programs: Are there lessons for wilderness? International Journal of Wilderness (pp. 32-33).

Manning, R. E. (2003). Emerging principles for using information/education in wilderness management. International Journal of Wilderness (pp. 20-27 & 12).

Martin, D. C. (1992). The effect of three signs and a brochure on visitors' removal of pumice at Mount St. Helens. In Christensen, H. H., Johnson, D. R., & Brookes, M. H., tech. Cords. Vandalism: Research, Prevention and Social Policy (pp. 121-131) Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

Molitor, A. B. (1995). The Effects of Persuasive Communication Messages on Backcountry Visitor Behavior in Occupied Grizzly Bear Habitat. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Missoula, MT: University of Montana.

Moore, T. H. (1995). The Use of Signage in Reducing the Destructive Behavior of Trail Users. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Guelph, ON: University of Guelph.

Peine, J. D., Walker, C. A., Motts, P. H., & Hammitt, W. E. (1984). Evaluating communications with visitors Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Atlanta, GA: USDI National Park Service, Southeast Region.

Reid, S. (2000). From dog waste to daisy pickers: "Leave No Trace" educates outdoor recreators. Parks and Recreation (pp. 70-77).

Reid, S., & Marion, J. L. (2003). The efficacy of visitor education programs. Paper published online at the Leave No Trace Web site (www.Int. org/TeachingLNT/teachingpdffiles/Inteducationeff ectiveness.pdf), last visited June 30, 2003.

Roggenbuck, J. W. (1992). Use of persuasion to reduce resource impacts and visitor conflicts. In: Manfredo, M. J., ed. Influencing Human Behavior: Theory and Applications in Recreation, Tourism, and Natural Resources Management (pp. 149-208).

Swearingen, T. C., & Johnson, D. R. (1994). Keeping visitors on the right track: Sign and barrier research at Mount Rainier. Park Science (pp. 17-19).

Widner, C. J. & Roggenbuck, J. W. (2000). Reducing theft of petrified wood at Petrified Forest National Park. Journal of Interpretation Research (pp. 1-18).

Winter, P. L., Sagarin, B. J., Rhoads, K., Barrett, D. W., & Cialdini, R. B. (2000). Choosing to encourage or discourage: Perceived effectiveness of prescriptive verses proscriptive messages. Environmental Management (pp. 589-594).

Wirsching, A. (2001). Visitor Preferences of Leave No Trace Poster Designs. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.

Amy Wirsching is a former graduate student in the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management at North Carolina State University. Yu-Fai Leung, Ph.D., and Aram Attarian, Ph. D., are assistant professor and associate professor, respectively, in the same department.