Garnet Ghost Town Visitor Surveysesrc.wsu.edu/pub/blm/reports/FY12/blm-GAGH912.pdfGarnet Ghost Town...
12
Garnet Ghost Town Visitor Survey Introduction In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at 24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation . The information collected during the survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials. The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal (NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to rounding). The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be found on page 9. FY12 GPRA Satisfaction Measure Percentage of site visitors satisfied overall with appropriate facilities, services, and recreational opportunities: 98% Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior Report # GAGH912 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Proportion of respondents Very poor Poor Average Good Very good 0% 0% 2% 21% 77% FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8 Overall quality of recreation experience FY12: 165 respondents Rating
Transcript of Garnet Ghost Town Visitor Surveysesrc.wsu.edu/pub/blm/reports/FY12/blm-GAGH912.pdfGarnet Ghost Town...
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Survey
Introduction
In order for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to comply with the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and better meet the needs of the public; a visitor satisfaction survey was conducted at
24 BLM recreation sites in 13 states during fiscal year 2012 (FY12). The survey was developed to measure
each site's performance related to BLM GPRA Goal 3.1 - Provide for a quality recreation experience,
including access, and enjoyment of natural and cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and
waters; and Goal 3.2 - Provide for and receive fair value in recreation. The information collected during the
survey will also help the BLM better serve the public. The survey collected visitor satisfaction data
regarding visitor information (i.e., use of maps, signs, brochures), developed facilities, managing recreation
use, resource management, BLM staff and customer service, and educational and interpretive materials.
The results of the visitor satisfaction survey conducted at Garnet Ghost Town are summarized in this data
report. A description of the research methods and limitations can be found on the next page. Below (left) is
a graph summarizing visitor opinions of the "overall quality of recreation experience." The satisfaction
measure next to this graph is a combined percentage of "good" and "very good" responses. This is the
primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.1 and should be used for reporting performance for this goal
(NOTE: the satisfaction measure may not equal the sum of "very good" and "good" percentages due to
rounding).
The response rate for this site survey was 98%. The graph and satisfaction measure summarizing visitor
opinions of the “value for fee paid”, which is the primary performance measure for GPRA Goal 3.2, can be
found on page 9.
FY12 GPRASatisfaction MeasurePercentage of site visitors satisfied
overall with appropriate facilities,
services, and recreational opportunities:
98%
Garnet Ghost Town
Visitor Information
Report prepared by the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit for the Bureau of Land Management, US Department of the Interior
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Managing Visitor and Recreation Use
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Resource Management
Report # GAGH912
Research MethodsSurveys were distributed to a random sample ofvisitors at this site during a selected period inFY12, The survey response rate is described on thefirst page of this report, meaning that 98% of thoserandomly sampled responded to the survey.Thedata reflect visitor opinions about this site'sfacilities, management, services, educationalopportunities, and fees during the survey period.Visitor activities and selected demographics werealso captured. A representative sample of thegeneral visitor population were surveyed atselected locations. The results do not necessarilyapply to visitors during other times of the year, orvisitors who did not visit the survey locations onsite.
Returned surveys were electronically scanned andthe data analyzed. Frequency distributions werecalculated for each indicator and category.
All percentage calculations were rounded to thenearest percent.
The survey response rate is described on the firstpage of this report. The sample size (n) varies fromfigure to figure, depending on the number ofresponses.
Caution is advised when interpreting any data witha sample size of less than 30. In such cases, theword “CAUTION!” is included in the graph. Thisreport excludes any indicator with less than 10responses.
For most indicators, the survey data are expected tobe accurate with in ± 6% with 95% confidence.This means that if different samples had beendrawn, the results would have been similar (±6%)95 out of 100 times.
For more information about this survey, contact Jennifer Hoger Russell, BLM Survey Project Coordinator
at the University of Idaho Park Studies Unit (208) 885-4806
Garnet Ghost Town
Research Methods
Understanding the Results
Inside this report are graphs that illustrate the survey results. The report contains 8 categories of dataregarding BLM amenities, staff, and services plus selected demographics. Within these categories are graphsfor each indicator evaluated by site visitors. For example, the Visitor Information category includesindicators such as “providing useful maps and brochures,” “adequate signs on site for direction,” and soforth. In each category there is a graph entitled “Everything Considered”. This graph is the basis fordetermining visitor satisfaction for each category and GPRA reporting numbers.
Each graph includes the following information:
• The number of visitor responses for the indicator;• The percentage of responses which were "very good," "good," "average," "poor," and "very poor;"• A "satisfaction measure" that combines the percentage of total responses which were "very good" or "good;" and•!An average evaluation score (mean score) based on the following values: very poor= 1, poor= 2, average= 3, good= 4, very good= 5.
• The higher the average evaluation score, the more positive the visitor response• Graph percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding
51 2 3 4
Very
PoorVery
Good
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
1%
1%
10%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
15%
32%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
25%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
3%
6%
12%
41%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
4%
24%
72%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
11%
40%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
42%
54%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
14%
35%
51%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
45%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
33%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
8%
31%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
9%
27%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
31%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
34%
61%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
27%
69%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
30%
65%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
21%
77%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 84% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.7
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 86% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 90% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 92% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.6
2
4
6
5
3
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Developed Facilities
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
6%
13%
35%
47%
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 82% Average evaluation score: 4.2
Everything considered: quality ofBLM visitor information
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Providing adequate signs on sitefor direction and orientation
FY12: 184 respondents
Rating
Providing usefulmaps and brochures
FY12: 188 respondents
Rating
Ensuring public awarenessof rules and regulations
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: overallcondition of developed facilities
FY12: 186 respondents
Rating
Maintaining aclean site
FY12: 191 respondents
Rating
Maintaining roads formotorized vehicles
FY12: 193 respondents
Rating
Maintaining trails fornon-motorized use
FY12: 133 respondents
Rating
Maintaining cleanliness of restroomsand other physical facilities
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: visitor andrecreation management
FY12: 179 respondents
Rating
Managing thenumber of people
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Managing the appropriateuse of vehicles
FY12: 164 respondents
Rating
Keeping noise atappropriate levels
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Providing sufficient law enforcementpresence to prevent crime
FY12: 130 respondents
Rating
Everything considered: BLM protectionof natural and cultural resources
FY12: 175 respondents
Rating
Ensuring that visitor activities do notinfringe on resource protection
FY12: 176 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thenatural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Adequately protecting thecultural resources
FY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Overall quality ofrecreation experience
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Providing useful informationon the Internet
FY12: 88 respondents
Rating
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
11%
29%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
20%
29%
49%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Primary Activities at this Site/Area
Primary activitiesFY12: 196 respondents**
Activities
** Percentages do not equal 100 because visitors could choose more than one activity.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Other
Birdwatching/wildlife viewing
Education and interpretation
Motorized recreation vehicles
Bicycling
Driving for pleasure
Rock climbing
Horseback riding
Non-motorized boating/rafting
Motorized boating
Swimming
Hiking/walking
Picnicking
Sightseeing
Target shooting
Hunting
Fishing
Camping
2%
6%
30%
1%
2%
26%
0%
2%
1%
0%
2%
44%
16%
55%
1%
0%
2%
5%
10
Garnet Ghost Town
BLM Staff and Service
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.9
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 99% Average evaluation score: 4.8
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 97% Average evaluation score: 4.8
7Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
1%
9%
91%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
17%
82%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
1%
12%
87%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
1%
2%
14%
83%
Garnet Ghost Town
Providing Educational and Interpretive Material
Report # GAGH912
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
4%
28%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
15%
38%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
7%
30%
62%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
6%
35%
60%
Everything considered: interpretiveand educational program
FY12: 163 respondents
Rating
Providing stewardship information onhow to protect the cultural and
natural resourcesFY12: 142 respondents
Rating
Providing quality educational andinterpretive material aboutthe resources at this site
FY12: 166 respondents
Rating
Providing a sufficient quantity ofeducational and interpretive materials
about the resources at this siteFY12: 161 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 96% Average evaluation score: 4.6
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 93% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 85% Average evaluation score: 4.3
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 94% Average evaluation score: 4.5
8
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Demographics
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of respondents
Female
Male
62%
38%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of respondents
18-21
22-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71 and over
8%
16%
20%
22%
19%
12%
3%
11
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
Children (under 12)
Teenagers(13-17)
Adults(18 and over)
14%
7%
79%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
1-2
3-5
6 and more
48%
48%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
78%
22%
0%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of groups
none
1-2
3-5
6 and more
74%
21%
3%
2%
Report # GAGH912
Garnet Ghost Town
Fees
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
> $50
$25 - $50
Under $25
No fees
0%
1%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Far too high
Too high
About right
Too low
Far too low
0%
1%
81%
17%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly agree
1%
0%
7%
43%
49%
9
Park Studies Unit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
2%
18%
80%
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 98% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Programs (interpretive, walk, tour,exhibit, presentations, etc.)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
2%
7%
42%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
12%
36%
52%
Ability to understand themessagesFY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to use the servicesin this areaFY12: 42 respondents
Rating
Ability to access exhibits,waysides, etc.
FY12: 45 respondents
Rating
Ability to adequatelyuse the facilities
FY12: 43 respondents
Rating
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 91% Average evaluation score: 4.4
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 89% Average evaluation score: 4.5
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 88% Average evaluation score: 4.4
Garnet Ghost Town
Accessibility to Visitors with Disabilities
Report # GAGH91212
FY12: Satisfaction measure: 78% Average evaluation score: 4.2
FY12 Satisfaction measure: 95% Average evaluation score: 4.8
Commercial Recreation Operations
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Proportion of respondents
Very poor
Poor
Average
Good
Very good
0%
0%
5%
10%
86%
Quality of Commercial ServicesFY12: 21 respondents
RatingCAUTION!
Everything considered: performanceof BLM staffFY12: 181 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge about thenatural and cultural resources in the area
FY12: 165 respondents
Rating
Staff treated mecourteouslyFY12: 185 respondents
Rating
Staff demonstrated knowledge aboutrecreational opportunities in the area
FY12: 158 respondents
Rating
Total fees paidFY12: 196 respondents
Amount spent
How appropriate was the fee charged for this site/area?
FY12: 148 respondents
Rating
The value of the recreationopportunity was at least equal
to the fee asked to pay.FY12: 138 respondents
Rating
Quality of program(s) attendedFY12: 90 respondents
Rating
Number of adults(18 and over) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Adults in group
GenderFY12: 146 respondents
Gender
Respondent ageFY12: 158 respondents
Age (years)
Visitor group compositionFY12: 129 groups
Age group
Number of teenagers(13-17) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Teenagers in group
Number of children(under 12) in group
FY12: 129 groups
Children in group
