What Impacts Does Tourism Have on Dovedale? - Evaluation of our survey.

by stephenharrison (student)

Evaluation

Trampling Survey:

When we were carrying out the trampling survey, we realised that good parts of the survey were that it did give us a general ides of what the surface consisted off in that area. It also gave us an idea of weather the surface had anything present on it that should not be & weather this was an indication of erosion. It also gave us an idea of how well the site was managed. Overall this was the correct method to use as it could use figures as oppose to descriptions. However this surveying method could easily have been made more accurate. The problems with these methods were that it heavily relies on your own observation & mental calculations so even though the quadrat only covered a space of 0.5m2, you could still only do a rough estimate on the relative proportions of surface so that it added up to 100%. Another problem was that, particularly along the braded path, we had not created a survey point for separate analysis of bare soil & exposed rock. So when it came to analysing the braded path we had to count the bare soil & the exposed rocks as the same point of analysis. This therefore decreased the accuracy of the results, particularly on sites 3 & 4, as on the final presentation the two could not be distinguished. These problems could have easily been solved by simpler modifications to the equipment & surveying method. The observational percentage problem could be solved by placing divisions of 25 equal squares inside the quadrat. The observation would be more accurate when estimating percentages & then adding up then smaller squares percentages would yield more precise & accurate results. The problem with differentiating between the bare soil & exposed rocks could simply be solved by making them separate points for analysis. If these modifications were implemented the reliability of the results would be greatly improved. If I had implicated these modifications I would have concluded that the trampling survey method was capable of yielding much more accurate results of eroded ground & we would have been able to make more definitive conclusions from the m ore precise & more efficiently sorted & categorised data.

Environmental Impact Assessment:

The EIA was a survey carried out at every site. It was based on ranking categories out of 5. There was one option of the left & the opposite to that was on the right. If you were to agree with statement 1you ticked the number 1 box. If you were to agree with the opposite statement 2 you ticked the number 5 box. And if you were somewhere in-between you ticked box 2, 3 or 4. The Main good point of this survey was that it enabled you to give you own opinion about the dove dale site. I also translated opinion into figures, so that the data could easily be displayed in a form of graph, in this case pictograms. However basing this survey on opinion is also it’s greatest weakness. This is as it is impossible to make opinions uniform. As everyone is going to draw from different experiences in their life. Even if they are previously bases off a stimulus. Another bad point about the EIA is that some of the categories don’t actually give an accurate insight into the impact tourist have on the environment. Such as how ‘Special a sight is’. However these problems could be made less of an issue b a few simple modifications to the method. For example when deciding what rank a site gets on the various criteria, beforehand a picture of a site that scores 3 (Decided by a teacher) in all categories should be given out & ratings should be based off this. Secondly all points that don’t contribute something to the overall picture of the state of the environment, such as how special a site is should be removed from the survey. This way a more accurate picture is built up on criteria that matter. This would improve the survey to its full potential. This would have affected my conclusions of the data as I would have been more confident to present the data as valid & relevant data to draw conclusions that would answer the overall question.

Pedestrian Counts:

This is a preview of the whole essay

Pedestrian Counts:

When we were carrying out the pedestrian counts were realised that good point of this surveying method were that it gave us a good idea of where the majority of people were heading to on the whole of the Dovedale site. It also gave us a good idea of where people liked to congregate on the site. It also gave us a rough idea of the numbers of people in the area, how popular an area was. Finally it gave us good idea of which paths people like to use & in which direction the usually walked on them. However some of the bad point about this method were that we only did it for 5 minutes at a time. And as the sites were spaces quite far apart if there was a group between sites or one approaching just a we finished we could not count them. Another problem was that we only did one per site at a similar time of the day. So as this was in the morning we did not get a good idea if the results changed dramatically when more people arrived later on. However these problems could easily be fixed by a couple of improvements. First off carry out each survey for 10 or 15 minutes, so it is unlikely that people would remain between sites & not be counted. The second improvement is that the survey should be carried out 3 times at each site. So once when we arrive, another when we are half way through our trip & again at the end of our trip. We could also split up the groups of 4 so that the surveys are done simultaneously & would therefore be more accurate. This would have impacted on my conclusions as I would have been able to look at the variance of the results at different times of the day & explain this to help answer the overall question with more depth & evidence.

Photographs of Management:

As I was taking the photographs to show evidence I thought the good points of this method is that it is direct evidence from the site that has not been turned into numbers from observation & opinion. So it is pure raw data that only needs to be analysed. The photos also don’t lie & only show what was on the site. However some of the bad points about using photos for evidence is that if you are taking them to show one specific things you are only showing evidence for that & not showing evidence that supports other things. For example if you are taking photos to show evidence of management you are not taking photos which show evidence of no management. These could easily outnumber those that show evidence of management. Another point is that photos can be taken out of context. So if I take a photo of a sign I could say it was anywhere on the whole of the Dovedale site. Finally photo’s only represent a split second view. So a sign which is there now could easily not be there in 6 months time, for multiple reasons. These problems could easily be solved by taking steps such as taking photos that show management & where the management has been neglected & see what the proportions are. Secondly take a photo of the sign in its location so it cannot be misinterpreted & taken out of context. Finally take a photo of the same evidence 6 months on to prove that the management is constant. These modifications would have impacted on my conclusions as I could have then commented on how the existence of the management effects tourists & then make reference to the overall question the answer it with more knowledge.

Questionnaire:

While taking down data for the responses to the questionnaire I thought that the good points about doing the questionnaire were that I gave me people real life experiences which gave a real representation about aspects of traffic surrounding dove dale. Such as the scale of its sphere of influence & how much of a problem congestion & parking caused. However the couple of main bad points about the questionnaire were that I had to ask members of the public walking around Dovedale. Unfortunately some members of the public were no co-operative at all, so it was harder to collect data about traffic this way, then for example doing a car count. Another bad point is that I collected data for the questionnaire on a day that was not particularly busy as it was a working weekday & the weather was only average. So for example had I done this on a warm weekend the data collected about finding a parking space & congestion could easily have been different. However it is always inevitable that some people are out to enjoy themselves & don’t want to be bothered by giving information for a questionnaire. However the problem based around the time at which the questionnaire was asked could easily be solved by carrying it out on a weekend day. The results could then easily be compared to give a more accurate picture about the traffic issues surrounding Dovedale. These modifications would have affected my conclusions as I then could have included comments about the variance in results & what factors effect this & then linked this to answering the overall conclusion.

Conclusions:

My conclusions are that the trampling survey yielded results that were accurate enough to see if erosion was prominent, which the main focus of this survey was. Smaller erosion details could not be seen due to inaccuracies in observation & counting exposed rocks & bare soil as the same point of analysis. However it still showed erosion where you knew it was present from being on the site. It was also clear which sites were managed & which were not. I believe that the EIA was not very useful when analysing the environment. This was because irrelevant question such as how ’special’ the site was were asked. Even the relevant questions such as how clean & tidy the site was were not very reliable as they were all based on opinion & people experiences of what to rate them against vary, so these results were not very reliable. Overall a much better picture of the environment could have been demonstrated to see within their own eyes by taking photographs. I believe that the pedestrian counts were very useful when analysing the number of people in the vicinity & where they were heading to on the site as well as which paths they like to use to get there. The only problem was that the amount of people varies depending when you conducted the surveys in the day. However it is likely that all the results would be in rough proportion depending at which time you did them. So overall the pedestrian counts were very useful for analysing patterns in where people liked to go to & congregate. The photos were also very useful for demonstrating various points for analysis around the site. This was it was pure raw, unconverted data form the site. You could also take plenty of them across the whole site to show any form of management you saw. However the only weakness was that if you took a photo of just the sing, not showing where you took it on site it was harder to explain the situation of management it was used in, but overall a very reliable point of analysis. The final method of analysis, which was conducting the questionnaire, proved extremely useful. It enabled data to be put in pie & bar charts so it could easily be compared & trends could also be identified. But it also enabled me to present data in sphere of influence. This conveyed Dovedales’ influence in much clearer way then just writing the places from which they came. It also collected data from people who hade experienced different traffic issues surround Dovedale to you, so you could easily see what the most common views & problems surrounding Dovedale were. Overall then I believe that for analysing Dovedale, all the methods used were the correct ones apart from the EIA. The EIA should be replaced by taking photographs as these convey a reliable, opinion free set of data.