time would they have spent in Rodney if there was no marine reserve? How much money did visitors spend in Rodney?
Jenna Martin and Katrina Subedar, graduate students based at the Leigh Marine Lab, were employed to conduct visitor surveys. Visitors were identified as either day trip visitors to the Rodney District, overnight visitors to Rodney District, or living or owning property within the Rodney District (even if the property owner lived elsewhere). Interviewers showed a map so that people understood that Orewa is within Rodney District. A different questionnaire was tailored to each of the three groups to investigate how much longer people stayed in the Rodney District as a result of the existence of the
marine reserve and how much money questionnaires including instructions for
spent. The three interviewers are in
In surveys where respondents were asked to estimate interviewer then asked if the respondent would take a
prepaid envelope containing the same spending questions to over the remainder of the day and send back to DOC to comparison of estimated spending to actual spending (see one). Survey respondents were asked questions relating to the of their entire group to increase the effective sample size.
complete enable a appendix spending
One thousand surveys covering the spending of 3,800 people were conducted by the students between December 24, 2007 and June 13, 2008. The surveys were done in 4 time blocks of 250 surveys with each time block representing approximately quarter of the annual visitors. Block one from December 24 - January 9 was surveyed on
most days and showed a predominance of New longer visits. Block two from January 10 interviewed most days with a mix of visitors on
Zealand families on
February 30 was
shorter visits. Block
December a number
1- 23. Block three of school groups
was surveyed in March when there were
the ‘off season’ from May 1 – October 31 and was 17 – June 13; this group contained a higher portion
of foreign visitors. In addition to these students, the author conducted 160 surveys as a quality control check.
1,000 surveys by from January 11 –
the two 14, 2008
The average spending from the four lots of data did not vary significantly from each other, or from the 160 quality control surveys. Hence the quality control surveys were included in the analysis, and the total sample was considered to be a reliable measure of average spending of all visitors. The motivation for carrying out the quality control surveys was the initial significant variance in results between interviewers for some questions from Lot 1 data. The quality control
surveys found middle-ground means on the variance, and results of surveys in Lots 2- for each interviewer merged towards those
questions with interviewer 4 showed that the average