NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Visual Preferences of Travelers Along the Blue Ridge Parkway

This chapter summarizes the major findings of the research reported in Chapters 2 through 8. Management considerations are also provided. The numbering of these management considerations does not indicate rank of importance.

Taken collectively, the findings form the basis for modifying the management covenants that establish guidelines for the development and maintenance practices along the Blue Ridge Parkway.

Chapter 2
(A Cognitive Psychological Approach)

Abstract

Sightseeing, a major outdoor recreational activity, depends greatly on the perceptions of visitors and the agency's management of the visual environment. To assist the Blue Ridge Parkway in managing its scenic landscapes, visitor preferences for parkway pull-off vistas were assessed, and options for managing the vegetation at vistas and roadsides were evaluated. Visual preference ratings of photographs were used to analyze the perception of Blue Ridge Parkway visitors for vista landscape scenes. A major purpose of the research sought to identify vista landscape themes or major landscape prototypes for developing a visual preference typology of vistas along the parkway.

This typology, based on those vista landscape themes most to least preferred, consists of scenes of (1) streams and rivers, (2) ponds and lakes, (3) mountains with several ridges, (4) pastoral development, (5) mountains with one ridge, and (6) unmaintained vegetation blocking the view. Among the management alternatives, the visitors favored the re-opening of vistas where vegetation blocks over 50% of the view and the mowing of only one mower width from the roadside.

Management Considerations

1. The Blue Ridge Parkway should continue to use visual preference ratings of on-site visitors in monitoring and managing the vistas and other visual resources of the parkway.

2. Based on the visual preference typology developed, the Blue Ridge Parkway should give priority to the management of those vistas most preferred by visitors.

3. An exception to the above category is the "unmaintained vegetation vistas." Re-opening of vistas where 50% or more of the view is blocked should receive priority, particularly if the vista landscape is a preferred type. However, visitors will tolerate vegetation blocking 20 to 30% of the view.

4. Roadside mowing should consist of one mower width (7 ft) from the road's edge, except in developed areas and around road or interpretive signs. Summer wildflowers should not be mowed when possible.

Chapter 3
(A Sociological Approach)

Abstract

The aesthetic preferences of 691 respondents were analyzed by using several relevant social background characteristics—socioeconomic status (SEI), age of respondent, sex of respondent, where the respondent was reared to age 16, highest educational level attained by the respondent, and the total household income of the respondent. The respondents were predominately male, equally likely to be raised in the city, town or country, highly educated, of higher occupational and income levels, and representative by age of the adult population in the United States. Individuals from lower social class levels were more likely to prefer the open vistas than those of the higher social class levels. Also, women were more likely than men to rate these vistas higher. Finally, older individuals rated these vistas higher than younger individuals.

Management Considerations

1. Given the "average" type of visitor to the parkway as represented in this sample, management should give serious consideration to the involvement of larger proportions of the visiting public. This presents a real problem that relates to the variety and complexity of vistas available for viewing. Perhaps more historical information about the particular vistas and pull-offs can be made available for this visitor.

2. The vista preferred by most was the Water Vista. Access to these types of vistas could be further developed to serve as highlights of one's trip along the Blue Ridge.

3. The Open Vistas should be kept as a central and integral experience of the parkway visitor. Most aesthetic experiences of the average parkway user will be received from these vistas. A strategic concentration of resources on these pull-offs would have the maximum effect for an investment of resources.

4. Finally, and this consideration is related to no. 1, management of our aesthetic resources faces a real dilemma in trying to please all the users all the time. This is because the aesthetic preferences vary significantly by social class levels, age, and sex. This means that the diversity that presently exists in our parkways and parks needs to be preserved through continued democratic policy.

Chapter 4
(A Social Psychological Approach)

Abstract

The sightseeing experiences of the touring public were investigated by exploring how the tourists' attitudes and values toward recreation and the environment influence their scenic preferences. Differences in attitudes toward nature included a group that believed the environment should be exploited and developed, while another group believed in preserving and protecting the environment. Recreational values varied from those who were physically active to those who preferred passive activities such as sightseeing. In short, the tourists exhibited divergent interests toward scenic beauty depending on their environmental beliefs and recreational interests.

Management Considerations

1. The frequency of stopping at overlooks and pull-offs is considered an important indicator of interest for a sightseeing experience. About a third of the visiting public heavily used pull-offs and overlooks. These provided an opportunity for taking photographs, which is also an extension of the sightseeing experience. Obviously, maintenance of overlooks and pull-offs is important. The degree to which they are maintained can vary from completely open to partially obscured.

2. Another indicator of interest in the parkway experience is repeat visits. A significant number (about one-third) of the tourists return apparently to revisit park sites, again frequently stopping and taking photographs to document their experience. This adds further support to continued maintenance of overlooks and pull-offs.

3. The majority of the tourists visiting the parkway believe that the aesthetic values associated with the roadway are important. Management should stress where the roadway offers visual opportunities through information and interpretive services.

4. The majority of tourists who believe that man must live in harmony with nature prefer the open vistas, but they also like the partially obscured vistas. Management can provide both forms of vistas but should realize that the open vista, irrespective of environmental attitudes, is preferred the most by the public.

5. The dominant recreational motive of experiencing the parkway through sightseeing activities, such as stopping and viewing, taking photographs, and learning through demonstration projects and interpretive programs, was central to the tourists' experience. This represents a highly passive recreational pattern adaptable to a parkway sightseeing experience. Programs reinforcing these passive recreational interests would be compatible with the interests of most of the parkway users.

6. Taste for open or maintained scenes also varied depending on the views tourists wish to see on the parkway. Those tourists who preferred to view natural scenes liked the open as well as the unmaintained vistas. Those tourists who preferred the rural pastoral scenes also liked the vistas that were open or just partially obscured. The maintenance of the parkway should be directed toward keeping vistas free of development and offering for view those aspects of nature and the rural visual experience which both tourist groups wish to experience.

Chapter 5
(A Psychophysical Approach)

Abstract

Enhancement of the scenic beauty of the landscape has long been a policy objective in the United States. However, the subjectivity involved in evaluating scenic beauty has hampered its incorporation into land management systems. In the first part of this chapter, the development of an approach to scenic beauty quantification is described. Based on the theory and methods of psychophysics, this approach derives metrics of perceived scenic beauty from observer ratings of photographic slides and then builds regression models of the scenic beauty metric predicted by observable and quantifiable landscape features. The second part of the chapter describes the application of this study on the Blue Ridge Parkway, in which the major research question concerned the impact of foreground vegetation on scenic beauty. Foreground vegetation was found to influence the visitors' perceptions of scenic beauty, but the direction of the influence depended on the location of the vegetation in the visual field. A follow-up study explored alternative explanations of this locational effect and concluded that it was the result of photographic content rather than the observers' cognitive processes.

Management Considerations

1. Foreground vegetation is important to the visitors' perceptions of the scenic beauty of landscape vistas. Specific elements in the foreground vegetation may add to or detract from scenic beauty, but our research has not succeeded in identifying them. Therefore, we suggest reliance be placed on the expert judgments of landscape architects for minute vegetation management decisions on individual sites. Allocation by landscape architects can be based on estimates of visitation to the various vistas.

2. We have not studied the visual impacts of vegetation manipulation. For example, if controlled burns are used to eradicate unwanted woody plants, there may well be a severe, if temporary, reduction in overall scenic beauty. If mechanical means are used to reduce brushy vegetation, it is advisable to remove the cuttings since all research has demonstrated negative visual impacts from dead and down wood. Obviously, these suggestions must be interpreted in terms of other criteria in addition to scenic beauty. For example, if herbicides are used, visitors may object to what they see as poisoning of the environment. Considerations of cost, nutrient cycling, erosion control, and other factors may lead to a choice of management actions that are scenically non-optimal. If this is the case, managers are advised to provide interpretive programs that explain the necessity and temporary nature of the environmental disruption to the visitors.

3. A major conclusion from our research over the years is that visual effects do not increase or decrease steadily with changes in the physical environment. Instead, scenic beauty often behaves in a marginal utility manner, in which a small amount of damage, for example, causes rapid declines in perceived scenic beauty, after which additional damage has little negative effect. Therefore, it is possible that a small amount of vegetation management on certain vistas might significantly raise scenic beauty estimates, while expensive work at heavily overgrown sites may provide little improvement in visitor satisfaction. While we cannot be more specific in our suggestions, we would advise parkway management to inventory vista scenic resources to determine sites where investment in vegetation management might provide the greatest returns.

4. A final general suggestion emerging from our research is that in scenic beauty, one can have "too much of a good thing." As noted in Part I of our chapter, jagged mountains and large urban trees contribute to scenic beauty but apparently only up to some point, after which additional increments lead to declines in scenic beauty. As to foreground vegetation on the parkway, as a general rule the more open the vista the better. However, carried to an extreme, this management guideline might well be counter-productive. A certain amount of foreground vegetation provides vista framing or perhaps is attractive in itself, as with flowering shrubs or plants that attract birds. Lawn-like vista foregrounds might be viewed as unnatural, and this might become even more of a liability if preferences for unmodified nature increase in the future. Some mixture of enclosed and open vistas might be sought in an effort to promote landscape diversity, a quality generally regarded as central to enduring, quality visual experiences.

Chapter 6
(A Communications Approach)

Abstract

This chapter deals with the extent to which the images and preferences of landscapes held by people can be modified. Specifically, the effects of a message promoting values of unmowed roadsides on the visitors' preferences for photographs depicting mowed and unmowed scenes along the Blue Ridge Parkway were examined. Respondents exposed to brief interpretive messages promoting the value of infrequent mowing regimes exhibited little preference for high intensity mowing photographs. In contrast, use of the same interpretive message resulted in a greater acceptance of low intensity mowing photographs. The use of a message to affect a person's perception of mowing did not carry over to a person's perception of other vegetation management practices (e.g., burning, shrub removal or tree removal).

Management Considerations

1. Interpretation can be an effective tool for promoting public understanding and appreciation of management programs. For example, a message promoting the benefits of less mowing on the Blue Ridge Parkway can be used to change the expectation that the parkway will be maintained like a front lawn or golf course.

2. Interpretation can also be used to encourage desired visitor behaviors and to minimize behaviors inconsistent with management policies.

3. Interpretive messages can be developed to garner support and shape public opinion toward specific actions without being generalized to other management activities. For example, the reasons for infrequent mowing regimes can be conveyed without visitors believing that other vegetation management practices (e.g., burning or tree removal) need to be reduced.

4 Positive images of Park Service operations can be developed. These images can be used to build constituent support, reduce unnecessary conflict, and produce better visitor understanding of National Park Service objectives.

Chapters 7 and 8
(Landscape Classification and Landscape Management Approaches)

Abstract

Chapter 7 reviews the historic vegetative management practices of the Scot-Irish and German settlers, including girdling, cutting and burning, grazing, and natural selection. It also describes the development and application of a landscape classification system for the Blue Ridge landscape that is based primarily on physical form, spatial characteristics, and viewer interactions. It concludes with a description of the screening criteria used for selection of actual images for photomontage simulations and how representative these images are of the total sample of Blue Ridge scenes.

Chapter 8 documents how certain representative landscape scenes were selected and modified via photographic montage techniques to simulate proposed vegetative management alternatives. It then analyzes the respondents' scenic preferences for the visual simulations of the vegetation management alternatives. Management recommendations are presented for the maintenance of scenic overlooks and roadside areas based on the biophysical/historical analyses and the perceptual testing data.

Management Considerations

1. Biophysical and Historical Management Considerations. Because of a climate highly conducive to plant growth, potentially prime viewing sites require constant care. Consequently, the introduction of self-maintaining native plant species would have obvious advantages over species requiring labor-intensive management. Basically, candidate plants must favorably respond to the view and slope. Introduced perennial vegetation should respond to the following environmental characteristics. First, since most soils on steep slopes and ridges are thin and low in nutrients, plants should be shallow-rooted, fibrous, and able to absorb and hold nutrients for extended periods of time. Second, since the climate is temperate and humid and the rainfall abundant, plants should be able to withstand the potential erosive effects of heavy rainfall, snow, and sedimentation. Plants should also be complementary in terms of form, size, and texture and respond to the surrounding site context; even more importantly, the height of the plant should be self-maintaining and predictable because placement on a given slope with respect to the viewer position is crucial in maintaining the desired view. In most cases, native grasses such as broom sedge can be used. Again, consideration should be given to the first two basic elements—the viewer position and the scene to be viewed.

2. Perceptually-based Management Considerations. Perceptually based results support roadside mowing every 3 or 4 weeks when the grass is about 8 in. tall. Mowing should extend to some natural break close (within a couple mower widths) to the road's edge. Annual maintenance and maintaining 66% openness of vistas are equally preferred so shrub cutting should occur every 5 to 7 years when the shrubs begin to significantly block distant views. Cutting to remove large amounts of woody material from an overgrown vista is supported, but cutting is not supported when the vista is only partially blocked, or when significant residual woody material is left which partially blocks the view. In other words, we do not recommend cutting unless there is potential for creating substantial increased visual access or open views. Controlled burning is also not supported as a visual management technique unless it shows potential for substantial improvement in view vista quality and context.

3. Synthesis. The above recommendations regarding roadside mowing and vista maintenance speak for themselves. In addition, the analysis shows greater support for vista maintenance than roadside mowing. The major synthesis would be the combination of periodic mowing of roadsides and brush clearing combined with the introduction of native plants that either (1) maintain low height and uniform texture and/or (2) are historically representative of past vegetative management practices at suitable locations. The latter would be especially appropriate near interpretive areas and facilities.

The question of the total mix of vegetative management over the length of the parkway is more difficult. Since the investigators dealt primarily with static images and simulations, we would propose that questions involving spatial sequences of visual experiences need sequential or dynamic simulation. Future research could simulate moving sequences of vegetative management changes along the Blue Ridge Parkway, utilizing video with different simulation media such as scale models, computer-assisted graphics, or electric photomontage (computer and video) to illustrate management alternatives in "real time" sequence.

Conclusions

At the time of printing, the data base gathered from this multidisciplinary research project was still in the process of being further analyzed. The contributors to this book only dealt with the broad findings and trends. More specific theoretical and methodological issues will be published in scientific journals.

Understanding visual preference still remains an area of study where few explanations are available, but it is of great interest to those agencies and institutions that offer sightseeing experiences. We trust that the different approaches presented in this monograph give the reader an expanded outlook toward the many complexities associated with the issue of measuring visual preference.