Anza Borrego Desert State Park - California State Parks - State of ...

Final Report – October 2001
MPS (spring) Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3 Photo 4 Photo 5 Photo 6
N
Valid 114 111 112 109 113 112
Missing 25 28 27 30 26 27
Mean 1.75 2.25 1.86 1.58 .41 -1.87
Median 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 .00 -3.00
Std Dev 2.66 1.95 2.04 2.16 2.64 2.75
MPS (total) Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3 Photo 4 Photo 5 Photo 6
N
Valid 159 156 157 153 156 157
Missing 30 33 32 36 33 32
Mean 1.87 2.29 1.90 1.63 .36 -2.03
Median 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 .00 -3.00
Std Dev 2.54 1.87 1.96 2.15 2.69 2.63
Table 55. Range of acceptability of photos 1 through 6 – Mountain Palm Springs
Increasing Trail Acceptable Neutral Unacceptable
Standard No. % No. % No. %
Total
Photo 1 114 71.7 12 7.5 33 20.8 159
Photo 2 134 85.9 8 5.1 14 9.0 156
Photo 3 121 77.1 19 12.1 17 10.8 157
Photo 4 112 73.2 15 9.8 26 17.0 153
Photo 5 76 48.7 15 9.6 65 41.7 156
Photo 6 31 19.7 8 5.1 118 75.2 157
Question 21 asked the visitors to respond to the following:
Of the six photos, which one represents the minimum level of trail standards the Park
should maintain, to provide the experience you expect?
In Table 56 and Figure 48 below, the majority of visitors preferred conditions
represented by Photos 1 and 2, although there was a rather wide distribution about
Photos 1 through 4.
Question 22 asked the visitors to respond to the following:
In order to maintain that level, what management actions should the Park undertake?
Please mark you level of agreement or disagreement with the following.
In Table 56 and Figure 49 below, the majority of visitors responded that the maximum
level of trail engineering they would tolerate was represented by Photos 1 and 2.
Interestingly, the responses to the ‘tolerance’ question were more crystallized around
Photos1 and 2 than were the responses to the ‘preference’ question.
68