Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
wilderness'. This would allow custodians of tourist facilities to provide for a wide range
of wilderness preferences and utilise a wide range of natural settings. However, arguably
such an approach had already been considered in the Australian wilderness inventory
process.
The wider spatial distribution of recreationists based upon an appreciation of
wilderness perceptions could contribute to the attainment of two fundamental goals: the
maximising of visitor satisfaction and the mitigation of environmental impact at tourist
sites. Kliskey and Kearsley (1993) also identified the need for a tourism development
approach that does not impact upon the values sought by those who try to avoid the
infrastructure of mass tourism, and to protect the social and environmental values that
nature-based tourists, or ecotourists, seek. However, this demands that wilderness
imagery assumes a role in the marketing and management of recreational and tourism
resources in natural settings.
Higham (1997) examined the dimensions of wilderness imagery by international
tourists in the South Island of New Zealand. This was done via a list of variables that may
be considered appropriate or inappropriate to wilderness recreation and tourism. A five-
point Likert scale allowed respondents to express the extent to which each variable was
considered acceptable or unacceptable. Higham (1997) noted that in 'classic' (i.e. high
quality in terms of absence of human impact) wilderness terms it should be expected that
these variables would be considered to violate or compromise qualities of wilderness
recreation. However, only seven of the twenty-two variables listed received a generally
negative response (a mean value less than 3.0). Thirteen variables returned mean values
exceeding 3.0 indicating a generally
Table 7.6:
Responses to variables listed in question
'Indicate whether you feel that the following
activities/ facilities are acceptable based on your
perception of wilderness' (%)
Variable list
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
Search and rescue operations
4.0
3.1 16.6 21.2 49.1
4.3
Distant from towns and cities
4.0
6.7 19.8 22.6 45.1
4.0
Swing bridges/walkwi res over rivers or streams
5.2
6.8 21.8 28.3 36.9
3.9
Restricted group size
10.5
9.5 16.6 24.9 33.5
3.8
Restricted access to prevent crowding
10.5
8.0 17.5 25.2 34.2
3.8
Big enough to take at least two days to walk across
8.9
6.8 18.8 24.3 39.4
3.8
Water provided in huts
14.3
7.9 17.7 22.3 36.9
3.6
Maintained huts and shelters
9.5 11.0 22.7 27.9 26.4
3.6
Toilet facilities
14.0
8.5 18.6 22.9 34.5
3.6
Exotic plants/trees (pines, thistles and foxgloves)
11.2 11.6 20.4 20.7 33.4
3.6
Signposts/information
7.0 12.8 24.8 24.5 29.4
3.6
Road access to the start of track
12.5 11.6 27.1 22.0 25.0
3.4
Maintained tracks (e.g. tracks cleared of fallen trees)
13.1 18.3 21.7 27.2 18.0
3.2
Developed camping sites
20.2 14.4 25.2 24.2 14.1
3.0
Grazing of stock (cattle, sheep)
31.2 15.9 25.7 11.9 11.3
2.7
Gas provided in huts for cooking
33.7 16.7 21.3 10.3 16.7
2.6
