Tourism, Recreation and Trail Impacts - Tourism and Trails: Cultural, Ecological and Management Issues - page 147

to those noises. They often go beyond being just annoyed, and are com-
monly related to perceptions of three things: (1) natural quiet; (2) visitor
enjoyment; and (3) safety concerns (Cessford, 2000). First, natural quiet
refers to the natural ambient conditions and sounds of nature. Second,
visitor enjoyment can often be impeded by noise intrusion, and this is
often the case where people value and define their recreation experience
differently, and where they may differ in their perceptions of what are
acceptable experience conditions. An example of this would be that the
motivations and goals of snowmobilers and cross-country skiers differ,
and it is more than a difference between motorized and non-motorized
forms of recreational activity (Jackson & Wong, 1982). Third, to some
(e.g. motorized vehicle to a non-motorized user) noise can relate to the
perception of a hazard that impacts their experience, whereas to others
(e.g. mountain bikers) the lack of noise can also be a hazard if they do
not hear who is coming from behind.
Cessford (2000) categorized noise effects that can generate social
impacts into four categories: (1) external non-recreational noise intrusions
(e.g. machinery use); (2) external recreational noise intrusions (e.g. sightsee-
ing aircraft); (3) onsite interactivity noise intrusions (e.g. people sharing
settings for different recreation activities, such as cross-country skiing
versus snowmobiling); and (4) onsite intra-activity noise intrusions (e.g.
social behavior of some people along trails, at huts, campsites and picnic
areas). He applied this typology to multi-case surveys across the Great
Walks in New Zealand (see a previous case study in Chapter 3), often rec-
ognized as the 'the front of the backcountry'. Five thousand visitors were
sampled and asked about social impacts, including those associated with
recreational noise. The extent to which recreational noise effects impacted
their level of enjoyment was measured using an awareness/annoyance
response scale that measured from one to four as shown in Figure 5.6.
Thirty-eight distinct noise-effects were identified; 11 were aircraft-
related, eight were motorboat-related, 10 were related to social noise in

I did not experience this
impact (1)

This impact did not bother
me (2)

This impact bothered me a
little (3)

This impact bothered me a
lot (4)

(noticed noise)

(bothered by noise)

Figure 5.6 The social effects of recreational noise
Source: After Cessford (2000).

( Continued )