A Technical Document Supporting the 2000

USDA Forest Service RPA Assessment

DEBORAH J. SHIELDS, INGRED M. MARTIN, WADE E. MARTIN, MICHELLE A. HAEFELE

Survey Results of the American Public’s

Values, Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes

Regarding Forests and Grasslands

Survey Results of the American Public’s

Values, Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes

Regarding Forests and Grasslands

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

A Technical Document Supporting the 2000

USDA Forest Service RPA Assessment

FOREST SERVICE

DEBORAH J. SHIELDS, INGRED M. MARTIN, WADE E. MARTIN, MICHELLE A. HAEFELE
Shields, Deborah J.; Martin, Ingrid M.; Martin, Wade E.; and Haefele, Michelle A. 2002.

Survey results of the American public’s values, objectives, beliefs, and attitudes

regarding forests and grasslands: A technical document supporting the 2000 USDA

Forest Service RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-95. Fort Collins, CO:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

111 p.

Keywords: public lands, public involvement process, values, objectives, beliefs, attitudes,

forest and grassland management, stakeholder engagement, strategic planning

Abstract

The USDA Forest Service completed its Strategic Plan (2000 Revision) in October 2000.

The goals and objectives included in the Plan were developed with input from the public,

some of which was obtained through a telephone survey. We report results of the survey.

Members of the American public were asked about their values with respect to public lands,

objectives for the management of public lands, beliefs about the role the agency should play

in fulfilling those objectives, and attitudes about the job the agency has been doing. The

public sees the promotion of ecosystem health as an important objective and role for the

agency. There is strong support for protecting watersheds. The public supports multiple

uses, but not all uses equally. Motorized recreation is not a high priority objective, while

preserving the ability to have a “wilderness experience” is important. There is moderate

support for providing resources to dependent communities. The provision of less consumptive

services is more important than those that are more consumptive. There is a lack of support

for subsidies for development and leasing of public lands. Preservation of traditional uses is

a somewhat important objective. Development and use of the best scientific information

enjoys wide support, as does information sharing and collaboration. A national direction for

the management of National Forest lands is a slightly important objective. Increasing law

enforcement on National Forests and Grasslands is an important objective and an appropriate

role for the agency. The public has a strong environmental protection orientation, has a

moderately strong conservation/preservation orientation, and supports some development.

Cover photos by Lane Eskew, G. Donald Bain, Chistie Van Cleve, and USDA Forest Service, RMRS.

You may order additional copies of this publication by sending

your mailing information in label form through one of the following

media. Please send the publication title and number.

Telephone (970) 498-1392

Email rschneider@fs.fed.us

Fax (970) 498-1396

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 W. Prospect Rd.

Fort Collins, CO 80526

This publication is also available on the web at http://www.fs.fed.us/rm.
Contents

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1

Background...................................................................................................................... 1

Data and Methods ........................................................................................................... 1

Findings ........................................................................................................................... 2

Demographics ............................................................................................................. 2

VOBA Results .............................................................................................................. 2

Strategic Plan Objectives for the USDA Forest Service .......................................... 2

Strategic Level Objectives of the Public .................................................................. 2

Public Lands Values ................................................................................................ 3

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4

Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 5

Survey Design and Implementation ................................................................................. 5

Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 6

Results ................................................................................................................................ 8

A. Demographic Description of Sample ........................................................................... 8

B. Survey Results Linked to USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan .................................. 8

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health ........................................................................................... 9

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People ........................................................................... 11

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance .............................................................. 16

Goal 4: Effective Public Service ................................................................................ 19

C. Survey Results for the Public Lands Values (PLV).................................................... 22

D. Survey Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Grouped by the Focus Group’s

 Strategic Level Objectives ..................................................................................... 24

Access ....................................................................................................................... 26

Preservation/Conservation ........................................................................................ 27

Economic Development ............................................................................................ 28

Education .................................................................................................................. 29

Natural Resource Management ................................................................................ 29

E. Survey Values, Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Linked to the Level of

Respondent Familiarity With the USDA Forest Service ............................................ 30

1. VOBA Results Linked to USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan Objectives

 by Familiarity ..................................................................................................... 31

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health..................................................................................... 31

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People ....................................................................... 34

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance .......................................................... 42

Goal 4: Effective Public Service ............................................................................ 48

2. Survey Results for the Public Lands Values by Agency Familiarity ....................... 51

3. Survey Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Grouped by Strategic

 Level Objectives, by Familiarity With the USDA Forest Service ............................ 52

Access................................................................................................................... 52

Preservation/Conservation .................................................................................... 54

Economic Development ........................................................................................ 55

Education .............................................................................................................. 56

Natural Resource Management ............................................................................ 58

Selected References ........................................................................................................ 60

Appendix A. Methodology ............................................................................................... 62

Survey Design and Implementation ............................................................................... 62

Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 63
Appendix B. Values Statements for NSRE Telephone Survey ..................................... 65

Appendix C. Objectives Statements for the NSRE Phone Survey ............................. 68

Appendix D. Beliefs Statements for the NSRE Phone Survey .................................... 71

Appendix E. Attitudes Statements for the NSRE Phone Survey ................................ 74

Appendix F. USDA Forest Service Familiarity Questions ........................................... 77

Appendix G. Weighted Means by Demographic Breakdowns Grouped According

to USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan Objectives .............................................. 78

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health ......................................................................................... 78

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People ........................................................................... 81

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance .............................................................. 89

Goal 4: Effective Public Service ................................................................................ 94

Appendix H. Weighted Means by Demographic Breakdowns Grouped by Public 

Lands Values ........................................................................................................... 98

Appendix I. Weighted Means by Demographic Breakdowns Grouped by Strategic

Level Objectives .................................................................................................... 101

Appendix J. Glossary of Terms................................................................................... 109

ii
List of Tables

Table 1. Modifiers used to describe survey response scores............................................. 7

Table 2. Comparison of National Survey on Recreation and the Environment

demographics with Census demographics ..................................................................... 8

Table 3. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 1.a.: Improve and

protect watershed conditions to provide the water quality and quantity and the soil

productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended beneficial water

uses, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................................................................................................................................ 9

Table 4. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 1.b.: Provide ecological

conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species and to

achieve objectives for Management Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................. 10

Table 5. National mean scores for. Strategic Plan Objective 1.c.: Increase the amount

of forests and grasslands restored to or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced

risk and damage from fires, insects and diseases, and invasive species, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 10

Table 6. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.a.: Improve the capability

of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor

recreation opportunities, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment .................................................................................. 11

Table 7. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.b.: Improve the capability

of wilderness and protected areas to sustain a desired range of benefits and values,

from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.. 12

Table 8. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.c.: Improve the capability

of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses,

values, products, and services, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment .................................................................................. 13

Table 9. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.d.: Increase accessibility

to a diversity of people and members of underserved and low-income populations

to the full range of uses, values, products, and services, from the VOBA module

of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ......................................... 14

Table 10. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.e.: Improve delivery of

services to urban communities, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment .................................................................................. 15

Table 11. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.a.: Better assist in

building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities, and private

landowners to adapt to economic, environmental, and social change related to

natural resources, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment..................................................................................................... 17

Table 12. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.b. Increase the

effectiveness of scientific, developmental, and technical information delivered to

domestic and international interests, from the VOBA module of the National Survey

on Recreation and the Environment ............................................................................. 18

Table 13. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.c.: Improve the

knowledge base provided through research, inventory, and monitoring to enhance

scientific understanding of ecosystems, including human uses, and to support

decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation’s forests and grasslands,

from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ... 19

iii
Table 14. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.d. Broaden the

participation of less traditional research groups in research and technical assistance

programs, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.................................................................................................................. 19

Table 15. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.a.: Improve financial

management to achieve fiscal accountability, from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................................. 20

Table 16. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.b.: Improve the safety

and economy of USDA Forest Service roads, trails, facilities, and operations and

provide greater security for the public and employees, from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................................. 20

Table 17. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.f.: Provide appropriate

access to National Forest System lands and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery

of all USDA Forest Service programs, from the VOBA module of the National Survey

on Recreation and the Environment ............................................................................. 21

Table 18. National mean scores for individual values scale items, from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................ 23

Table 19. Objectives hierarchy for the NSRE ................................................................... 25

Table 20. National mean scores for access, from the VOBA module of the National

Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................................................................. 27

Table 21. National mean scores for preservation/conservation, from the VOBA module

of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ......................................... 28

Table 22. National mean scores for economic development, from the VOBA module

of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ......................................... 28

Table 23. National mean scores for education, from the VOBA module of the National

Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................................................................. 29

Table 24. National mean scores for natural resource management, from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................ 30

Table 25. Demographics by familiarity with the USDA Forest Service, from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................ 30

Table 26. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 1.a.

Improve and protect watershed conditions to provide the water quality and quantity

and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended

beneficial water uses, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment..................................................................................................... 31

Table 27. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 1.b.:

Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired

nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management Indicator Species

(MIS)/focal species, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment..................................................................................................... 32

Table 28. Means by respondent familiarity - Strategic Plan Objective 1.c. Increase

the amount of forests and grasslands restored to or maintained in a healthy

condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and diseases, and

invasive species, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and

the Environment............................................................................................................ 34

Table 29. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.a.:

Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse,

high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities, from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................................................... 35

Table 30. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.b.:

Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas to sustain a desired range

of benefits and values, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment..................................................................................................... 37

iv
Table 31. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.c.:

Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide desired

sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services, from the VOBA module

of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment. ........................................ 38

Table 32. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.d.:

Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and members of underserved and lowincome populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services, from

the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ........... 40

Table 33. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.e.:

Improve delivery of services to urban communities, from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................................ 41

Table 34. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.a.:

Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities,

and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental, and social change

related to natural resources, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment .................................................................................. 43

Table 35. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.b.:

Increase the effectiveness of scientific, developmental, and technical information

delivered to domestic and international interests, from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment .................................................. 44

Table 36. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.c.:

Improve the knowledge base provided through research, inventory, and monitoring

to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including human uses, and to

support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation’s forests and

grasslands, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment ................................................................................................................. 46

Table 37. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.d.:

Broaden the participation of less traditional research groups in research and

technical assistance programs, from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment .................................................................................. 47

Table 38. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.a.:

Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability, from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ........................... 48

Table 39. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.b.:

Improve the safety an economy of USDA Forest Service roads, trails, facilities,

and operations an provide greater security for the public and employees, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 49

Table 40. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.f.:

Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands and ensure

nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 50

Table 41. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for public lands values, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 51

Table 42. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for access, from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................................ 53

Table 43. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for preservation/conservation, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 54

Table 44. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for economic development, from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ................ 55

v
Table 45. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for education, from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment ............................................ 57

Table 46. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for natural resource management, from

the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment .......... 58

vi
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 1

Executive Summary

Background

The Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-63) requires that each

Federal agency submit to Congress a five-year Strategic Plan. The Plan is to include longterm goals and objectives. Identifying the long-term goals and objectives is one of the most

critical aspects of Strategic Planning. The Results Act requires an agency to ask for the

views and suggestions of anyone “potentially affected by or interested in” its Strategic Plan.

The long-term goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan must therefore reflect not only the

agency’s mission, but also the public’s views and suggestions for our country’s forests and

grasslands. The USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan 2000 Revisions can be found at:

http://www2.srs.fs.fed.us/strategicplan/toc_view_plan.asp

The USDA Forest Service completed its Strategic Plan (2000 Revision) in October 2000.

The goals and objectives included in the Plan were developed by the agency with input from

the public. This input was obtained in several ways, one of which was through a telephone

based survey. This report presents the results of the survey in which approximately 7000

randomly selected members of the American public were asked about their values with respect to public lands, objectives for the management of forests and grasslands, beliefs about

the role the USDA Forest Service should play in fulfilling those objectives, and attitudes

about the job the USDA Forest Service has been doing in fulfilling their objectives.

Survey results will help the agency understand the public’s objectives, as well as the

underlying value sets that are the basis for these objectives. The data on beliefs provides

information on the degree of importance that the public associates with their objectives. The

attitudinal measures provide a useful insight into the public’s evaluation of how the USDA

Forest Service is meeting or fulfilling these objectives.

Data and Methods

The items in the survey have been extensively pre-tested and applied in various other

studies. The values scale was designed to focus on values that people hold for public lands

(called the Public Lands Values). It was tested using both students and adults around the

United States. The objectives scale items were developed using input from 80 focus groups

around the country. The beliefs and attitudes scales tier down from the objectives items.

The questions in the survey (hereafter referred to as the VOBA survey) are a set of scale

items. These are statements to which people are asked to respond using a five-point scale.

The objectives scale is anchored by 1=not at all important to 5=very important. Beliefs are

anchored by 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree and attitudes are anchored by 1=very

unfavorable to 5=very favorable. Each of these three scales consists of 30 items The 25

items in the values scale were anchored by 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree.

The objectives statements in the VOBA survey reflect the objectives espoused by the

members of the focus groups. All stakeholder interests were represented in the 80 focus

groups conducted around the continental United States. Several of the focus group participants had goals that, while not phrased exactly as in the Strategic Plan, were similar in

content. It should be noted that these public objectives were arrived at independently of the

Strategic Plan Objectives. The results of the broader public survey can then be used to gauge

public support for these focus group objectives.
2 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Findings

Demographics

The average age of respondents was 44 years, with approximately 24% aged 30 and under, 41% aged 31 to 50, and 35% over 50. Forty three percent of respondents were male,

57% female. Educational levels were varied, with 11% having less than a high school diploma, 27% having completed high school, 24% having some post-high school education,

26% holding Bachelor’s degrees, and 12% having a Master’s degree or higher. Average

annual household income was $59,000. The NSRE sample over represents non-metropolitan residents with 38% compared to 20% in the general population.

VOBA Results

The results are summarized in three ways. First, the responses are grouped according to

their relationship to the USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan. Second, results are organized

according to the public’s strategic level objectives. Finally, the Public Lands Values are

discussed.

Strategic Plan Objectives for the USDA Forest Service

We have identified VOBA objectives that will provide information about the level of

support for Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives. In this summary, we speak to the Strategic

Plan Goals and highlight selected VOBA objectives that indicate particularly strong support

for or disagreement with individual Strategic Plan Goals. Individual Strategic Plan Objectives are addressed in detail in the full report.

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health. There is wide support for the first goal described in the USDA

Forest Service Strategic Plan, as the public sees the promotion of ecosystem health as an

important objective for public lands and such protection as an important role for the USDA

Forest Service.

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People. Mixed results are found for the goal of providing

multiple benefits to people. The public supports multiple uses but does not support all uses

equally. For example, scores for VOBA objectives on motorized recreation indicate that this

is not a high priority objective. Conversely, preserving the ability to have a “wilderness

experience” is seen asimportant. Finally it should be noted that there is only moderate support for the provision of resources to dependent communities and traditional cultural uses.

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance. The goal of developing and using the best

scientific information enjoys wide support among the public. The public also supports information sharing and collaboration.

Goal 4: Effective Public Service. The delivery of public service elicits a response that is

mixed in a similar manner to that of providing benefits to the public. People see the provision of less consumptive services as more important than those that are more consumptive.

Especially noteworthy is the lack of support for continued subsidies for development and

leasing of public lands.

Strategic Level Objectives of the Public

This section groups the VOBA survey results so as to examine public opinions grouped

according to the strategic level objectives expressed by focus group participants during survey development.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 3

Access. The American public is divided in its opinion about the provision of access. This

is evidenced by the difference between support for motorized access and support for nonmotorized access. The expansion of off-highway motorized access and the development of

new paved roads are somewhat unimportant objectives and the provisions of trails for motorized access are slightly unimportant to the public. Contrast this with the provision of nonmotorized access which is viewed as a somewhat important objective to the public.

Preservation/Conservation. Protection of ecosystems is seen as an important objective

and as an important role for the USDA Forest Service. Especially noteworthy is the strong

support for conserving and protecting watersheds, both as a public objective and as a role for

the agency.

Economic Development. These items address determination of the level of extractive

uses of public lands. These objectives are supported at least moderately by the public.

Education. Providing information to the public about the use, management and conservation of forests and grasslands is considered an important objective for public land management agencies.

Natural Resource Management. Opportunities for public input into the management of

forests and grasslands are seen as important by survey respondents. Increased law enforcement, increased acreage in the National Forest system, and diverse uses are also viewed as

important objectives by the public.

Public Lands Values

The values scale was examined separately, with the items in the scale grouped into two

values dimensions: socially responsible individual values and socially responsible management values. The means for the individual values indicate that the public has a strong orientation toward environmental protection. The results for the management values indicate that

the public holds a moderately strong conservation/preservation orientation but that it also

supports some degree of development.
4 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Introduction

The USDA Forest Service completed its Strategic Plan (2000 Revision) in October 2000.

The Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-62) requires that each

agency’s Plan include long-term goals and objectives. Identifying the long-term goals and

objectives is one of the most critical aspects of Strategic Planning. These objectives must be

consistent with the mission of the agency, which is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future

generations. To fulfill this mission, the agency not only manages public lands, but assists

state and private landowners in the practice of good land stewardship and collaborates with

partners and the public as stewards of the forests and grasslands that it holds in trust for the

American people. In addition, the USDA Forest Service conducts scientific research on a

wide range of subjects related to the performance of the mission described above.

The Results Act requires an agency to ask for the views and suggestions of anyone “potentially affected by or interested in” its Strategic Plan. The long-term goals and objectives

of the Strategic Plan must therefore reflect not only the agency’s mission, but also the public’s

views and beliefs for our country’s forests and grasslands. This report presents the results of

a telephone survey in which randomly selected members of the American public were asked

about their:

• values with respect to public lands,

• objectives for the management, use and conservation of forests and grasslands,

• beliefs about the role the USDA Forest Service should play in fulfilling those objectives,

and

• attitudes about the job the USDA Forest Service has been doing in fulfilling their objectives.

Survey results will help the agency understand the public’s objectives, as well as the

underlying values that are the basis for those objectives. The data on beliefs and attitudes

will provide information on the importance that various public segments place on the agency’s

many current and potential activities. The survey on values, objectives, beliefs, and attitudes

(VOBA) was implemented as a module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE), which is conducted by USDA Forest Service1

.

The report of the survey is divided into two sections. The first section will give a brief

overview of the survey design, survey implementation, and data analysis methodology. Results of the data analysis are presented in the second section. The results section is further

divided into five subsections. The first subsection presents the basic demographic description of the survey results, the second subsection shows the survey results linked to the USDA

Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revisions), the third subsection presents the survey

results for the values questions, the fourth subsection presents the survey results grouped

according to strategic level objectives as expressed by the focus groups during survey development, and the fifth subsection presents the results of a subset of the data broken down

according to familiarity with the USDA Forest Service. Methodology is covered in more

detail in Appendix A. The values, objectives, beliefs and attitudes survey items are reported

in Appendices B through E respectively. Appendix F contains the Forest Service Familiarity

Questions, while Appendices G, H and I contain the full results for each subsection in tabular form. A glossary of terms appears in Appendix J.

1 Information on the NSRE is available from Dr. Ken Cordell, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research

Station, (706) 559-4263, email kcordell@fs.fed.us.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 5

Methodology

Survey Design and Implementation

Between September 1999 and June 2000, over 80 focus groups and individual interviews

were conducted across the lower 48 states. These interviews concentrated on 3 topics:

(1) issues related to the use of public lands in general and forests and grasslands in particular, (2) the objectives (or goals) of the group (or individual) regarding the use, management,

and conservation of the forests and grasslands, and (3) the role of the Forest Service in the

use, management and conservation of the forests and grasslands.

Based upon the results of the focus group interviews, an objectives hierarchy was constructed for each group. These hierarchies indicated what each group or individual was attempting to achieve and how they would achieve each goal or objective. These objectives

ranged from the very abstract strategic level to the more focused or concrete means level.

The means level objectives are at the bottom of the hierarchy while the strategic objective is

at the top. Fundamental objectives between the means level and the strategic level completed the hierarchies. Therefore, the strategic level objective is an abstract objective that

can be achieved by more specific fundamental level objectives, which are in turn achieved

by means level objectives (see figure 1).

Each of the objectives hierarchies was confirmed with its respective group so as to ensure

that it accurately reflected their goals and objectives. A combined objectives hierarchy was

then constructed that included all the objectives stated by each group or individual interviewed. The result was a hierarchy that covered 5 strategic level objectives related to access,

preservation/conservation, commodity development, education, and natural resource management. These 5 strategic level objectives were supported by 30 fundamental objectives.

The 30 fundamental level objectives were used to develop 30 objectives statements that

were used in the National Survey of Recreation and the Environment (NSRE). The NSRE is

a national survey administered via telephone interviews. The 30 objectives statements were

divided into 5 groups based upon the strategic level objectives that the focus groups had

identified. During the telephone interviews, each respondent was asked one statement from
6 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

each of the 5 strategic level groups in order to obtain a statistically valid sample for each

statement and for each strategic level group.

As noted above, the survey of the American public’s values, objectives, beliefs, and attitudes (hereafter VOBA) was conducted as a module within the NSRE. Questions about

respondents’ recreation behavior comprise the bulk of the interview; however, the results

presented here are based solely on the questions in the VOBA Module of the survey and the

demographic questions. The VOBA questions are sets of scale items which people are asked

to respond using a five-point scale. The objectives items are anchored by 1=not at all important to 5=very important. Beliefs are anchored by 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree

and attitudes are anchored by 1=very unfavorable to 5=very favorable. Each of these three

types of scales consist of 30 items. The 25 items in the values scale are anchored by 1=strongly

disagree and 5=strongly agree. The full four-part survey, comprised of 115 items, can be

found in Appendices B-E. For detail on methods see Appendix A.2

Data Analysis

This report is based on 7,069 responses to the NSRE phone survey. The data do not accurately reflect the demographics of the United States and so were weighted prior to analysis

to account for this. An overall weight was constructed based on the following demographic

factors: (1) age, sex, and race category (60 cells total), (2) education level, and (3) metropolitan or non-metropolitan area. These weights were constructed using the same method

developed for use with the full NSRE data set. Weighted means and standard deviations

were then calculated for each of the 115 items.3

In order to characterize the strength of preferences, modifiers have been assigned to ranges

for the item means and group means. An objective is characterized as “very important” if

the mean is 4.75 or above. Respondents are said to “strongly agree” that an item is an appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service (or that the item is a “very important” role) if the

mean falls into this range. Attitudes are “very favorable” if the mean is 4.75 or higher. No

modifier is attached to means between 4.00 and 4.75 (objectives are “important,” respondents “agree,” or the role is “important,” and attitudes are “favorable”). If the mean falls into

the range 3.25 to 4.00 objectives are “somewhat important,” respondents “agree somewhat”

that the item is a “somewhat important role” for the agency and attitudes are “somewhat

favorable.” “Slightly” is used to describe objectives, attitudes and beliefs which fall between 3.00 and 3.25. A mean of 3.00 is neutral. Objectives that fall into the range between

2.75 and 3.00 are “slightly unimportant,” a mean for beliefs in this range implies that respondents “disagree slightly” (or the item is a “slightly unimportant” role for the agency)

and attitudes in this range are “slightly unfavorable.” No modifier will be attached to objectives, beliefs, or attitudes between 1.25 and 2.00. Attitudes 1.25 or below are “very unfavorable.” Responses to beliefs items below 1.25 indicate that the public “strongly disagrees”

that the item is an appropriate role (or the role is “very unimportant”) and objectives in this

range are “very unimportant” (see table 1).

The items in the national survey instrument have been grouped into various subsets to

facilitate interpretation and analysis. These groups will be presented in three subsections

2 For a more in-depth discussion of how the scale items were developed and tested see Martin, Martin,

Shields and Wise (1999) and Martin, Martin, and Shields (2000).

3 The weighting method was originally developed for use with the full NSRE data set. Additional

information on the weighting methodology is available from Carter Betz, USDA Forest Service,

Southern Research Station, email cbetz@fs.fed.us or Dr. Michelle Haefele, Department of

Economics, Colorado State University, email mhaefele@fs.fed.us.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 7

within the Results section of this report. The three sections are: Survey Results Linked to

USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives, Public Lands Values (PLV), and

Survey Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Grouped by Strategic Level Objectives.

For all of the groupings of the data, responses to the demographic questions were used to

break the full data set down, first by region (east and west, divided at approximately the

100th meridian), then by metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties (based upon Census

classification) within each region.

The first 5,064 respondents were asked five questions designed to determine their familiarity with the USDA Forest Service. Responses to these questions were used to construct an

overall measure of familiarity. Respondents who correctly answered four or more of these

questions were designated as having a high degree of familiarity with the USDA Forest

Service. Those answering two or three correctly were designated as having a moderate level

of familiarity. Respondents who answered fewer than two of the questions correctly were

designated as having low agency familiarity. Results for this subset of respondents are

broken down by degree of familiarity and analyzed in a separate subsection of the Results

section. These are grouped as described above.

The weighted means for each item, divided by the subsets described above, and by the

demographic breakdowns, are presented in Appendices G (by Strategic Plan objectives), H

(Public Lands Values), and I (by Strategic Level Objectives).

Table 1. Modifiers used to describe survey response scores.

Range of

mean

Objectives for the management

of forests and grasslands

Beliefs about the role the USDA Forest

Service should have in fulfilling

objectives

Attitudes about the performance of

the USDA Forest Service in

fulfilling objectives

1.00 – 1.25 Objective is very unimportant Role is very unimportant

(or very inappropriate) Performance is very unfavorable

1.25 – 2.00 No modifier (unimportant) No modifier (role is unimportant or

inappropriate)

No modifier (performance is

unfavorable)

2.00 – 2.75 Objective is somewhat

unimportant

Role is somewhat unimportant (or

somewhat inappropriate)

Performance is somewhat

unfavorable

2.75 – 3.00 Objective is slightly unimportant Role is slightly unimportant (or slightly

inappropriate) Performance is slightly unfavorable

3.00 – 3.25 Objective is slightly important Role is slightly important (or slightly

appropriate) Performance is slightly favorable

3.25 – 4.00 Objective is somewhat important Role is somewhat important (or

somewhat appropriate) Performance is somewhat favorable

4.00 – 4.75 No modifier (objective is

important)

No modifier (role is important or

appropriate)

Non modifier (performance is

favorable)

4.75 – 5.00 Objective is very important Role is very important (or very

appropriate) Performance is very favorable
8 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Results

A. Demographic Description of Sample

The objective of the first step in the analysis was to develop an overall picture of the

NSRE respondents through examination of the demographic data. The average age of respondents is 44 years, with approximately 24% aged 30 and under, 41% aged 31 to 50, and

35% aged 51 and older. Forty-three percent (3,019) of respondents were male, 57% (4,038)

female. Educational level was varied with 753 (11%) having less than a high school diploma, 1,873 (27%) having completed high school, 1,706 (24%) having some post-high

school education, 1,816 (26%) holding bachelor’s degrees, and 828 (12%) having a master’s

degree or higher. Reporting income is less straight forward because some respondents gave

actual income figures while others would only identify their income category. Based on both

types of responses, average annual household income for all respondents was estimated at

$59,000/year. A comparison between the NSRE sample demographics and the most recent

census estimates is presented in table 2.

B. Survey Results Linked to USDA

Forest Service Strategic Plan

This section presents selected survey results linked to the USDA Forest Service Strategic

Plan goals and objectives. The goal of the national VOBA survey was to provide input for

revising the National Strategic Plan for the USDA Forest Service. The data collected regarding the objectives of the American public during the first stage of surveying were matched

with the existing Strategic Plan to provide additional input to the agency regarding the existing plan. The text which follows presents only the results for the full sample. Breakdowns

Table 2. Comparison of National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment demographics with Census demographics.

NSRE Sample Census

Age: 30 and under 24% 43%

31-50 41% 31%

51 and older 35% 27%

Sex: male 43% 49%

female 57% 51%

Education: less than high

school

11% 17%

high school

diploma

27% 31%

some college 24% 18%

bachelor s degree 26% 24%

post-grad degree 12% 7%

Residence: metro counties 62% 80%

non-metro counties 38% 20%
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 9

by demographic characteristics for the VOBA items by Strategic Plan Objectives can be

found in Appendix G.

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health: Promote ecosystem health and conservation using a collaborative approach to sustain the Nation’s forests, grasslands and watersheds.

The USDA Forest Service will promote ecosystem health and conservation using a collaborative approach to sustain the Nation’s forests, grasslands, and watersheds. Supporting

this goal are three specific objectives.

Strategic Plan Objective 1.a: Improve and protect watershed conditions to provide the

water quality and quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended beneficial water use.

The first objective supporting ecosystem health deals with protecting water and soil resources. The public responses for the items in the VOBA that support this objective are

found in table 3.

The public sees the protection of watersheds as an important objective for public land

management. In the West, those in metropolitan areas see this as a more important objective

than do their non-metropolitan counterparts. The public also agrees that this is an important

role for the USDA Forest Service, with metropolitan dwellers in the West viewing this as

slightly more important role for the agency than those in the non-metropolitan West. The

agency is also given a favorable evaluation for its performance in this area, with metropolitan westerners giving higher ratings than non-metropolitan westerners.

The public sees the development of volunteer programs that improve the quality of public

lands as an important objective and people see this as an important role for the agency.

Residents of metropolitan areas in both the East and West see this as a slightly more important objective than do those in non-metropolitan areas. The agency is given a somewhat

favorable performance rating for facilitating such volunteer programs.

Table 3. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 1.a.: Improve and protect watershed conditions to

provide the water quality and quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and

intended beneficial water uses. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.73

0.76a

4.61

0.83

3.91

1.17

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land (tree planting,

etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.46

1.03

3.85

1.25

a

 Standard deviation

Strategic Plan Objective 1.b: Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management

Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species.

Habitat protection is the second objective under the goal of ecosystem health. The responses to these items can be found in table 4.

Overall, the protection of ecosystems and wildlife habitat is seen as an important objective for public land management. This objective is more important to those respondents

living in metropolitan areas than to those in non-metropolitan areas. This difference is
10 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

especially pronounced in the West, with the exception of restricting mineral development.

Restriction of mineral development is a more important objective for metropolitan easterners

than it is for metropolitan westerners. Respondents also believe that habitat protection is an

important role for the USDA Forest Service, and again metropolitan dwellers (both East and

West) see this as a more important role for the agency. The USDA Forest Service is doing a

somewhat favorable job in fulfilling this objective.

Some of the means by which ecosystem health and habitat protection are to be achieved

(wilderness designation and the restriction of various extractive resource uses) are seen as at

least somewhat important objectives by the public and as somewhat important roles for the

USDA Forest Service. In cases where a significant difference between demographic groups

appears, metropolitan residents and Easterners are more supportive of such restrictive policies.

Table 4. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 1.b.: Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable

populations of native and desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management Indicator

Species (MIS)/focal species. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

6. Designate more wilderness to stop development &

motorized access

3.84

1.41a

3.66

1.46

3.45

1.34

8. Preserve natural resources through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

4.21

1.27

3.65

1.31

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.96

1.42

3.95

1.43

3.30

1.50

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.99

1.27

3.94

1.34

3.50

1.36

a

 Standard deviation

Strategic Plan Objective 1.c: Increase the amount of forests and grasslands restored to

or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and

diseases, and invasive species.

The restoration and maintenance of ecosystem health achieved through protection and

volunteer programs is an important objective for the public. See table 5.

Table 5. National mean scores for. Strategic Plan Objective 1.c.: Increase the amount of forests and grasslands

restored to or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and diseases,

and invasive species. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92a

4.53

0.98

3.90

1.16

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land (tree planting, etc.) 4.60

0.86

4.46

1.03

3.85

1.25

a

 Standard deviation
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 11

Metropolitan residents in both the East and West see the objective of protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat as more important than do those in non-metropolitan areas. Within

non-metropolitan areas, those in the East are more in favor of such programs than are

westerners.

The public sees these activities as important roles for the USDA Forest Service and views

the agency performance as somewhat favorable.

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People: Provide a variety of uses, values, products, and

services for present and future generations by managing within the capability of sustainable

ecosystems.

The second broad goal outlined in the Strategic Plan deals with the provision of benefits

to the American public. The USDA Forest Service seeks to provide a variety of uses, values,

products, and services for present and future generations by managing within the capability

of sustainable ecosystems. This goal is supported by five specific objectives.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.a: Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities.

The first Strategic Plan objective deals with providing outdoor recreation opportunities to

the public. The results for the VOBA questions dealing with this recreation objective are in

table 6.

Recreation opportunities can be divided into motorized and non-motorized. The provision of increased access for motorized recreation is seen as a slightly unimportant objective

for public land management and is also viewed as a slightly unimportant role for the USDA

Table 6. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.a.: Improve the capability of the Nation's forests and

grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Values

with respect to forests

 and grasslands

(1=strongly disagree

5=strongly agree)

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important

5= very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable

5=very favorable)

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.41

1.49a

2.52

1.50

2.97

1.45

2. Increase trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

2.98

1.51

3.25

1.38

5. Develop new paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.70

1.57

3.19

1.43

3. Increase trails for non-motorized recreation 3.75

1.33

3.71

1.37

3.59

1.27

4. Designate trails for specific use 3.59

1.43

3.94

1.25

3.61

1.33

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.22

1.09

3.79

1.21

20. Inform public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.50

0.93

3.89

1.31

28. Collect an entry fee to support National

Forests and Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.69

1.43

3.61

1.36

9. I would pay $5 more to use public lands

for recreation

3.49

1.60

a

 Standard deviation
12 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Forest Service. Non-metropolitan easterners and metropolitan westerners see motorized access as a more important objective than do non-metropolitan westerners and metropolitan

easterners. Agency performance in the area of motorized recreation is viewed as somewhat

favorable, except in the case of off-highway motorized access, where the agency role and

performance are rated as slightly unfavorable.

The provision of opportunities and facilities for non-motorized recreation is seen as a

somewhat important objective and as a somewhat important role for the agency. The agency

is viewed as doing a somewhat favorable job providing non-motorized access. Support for

non-motorized recreation opportunities is stronger in metropolitan areas than non-metropolitan areas. Separating these often conflicting types of pursuits by designating trails for

specific uses is seen as a somewhat important objective, with higher support outside of

metropolitan areas.

The use of volunteers to improve recreation facilities such as campgrounds, picnic areas

and trails is an important objective, as well as an important role for the USDA Forest Service. The strongest support for such programs appears in the western portion of the country.

Survey respondents also feel that it is important for the agency to provide information to the

public about recreation concerns such as trail etiquette and safety.

The expansion of commercial recreation is seen as a slightly important objective and a

slightly important role for the agency. The agency is providing a somewhat favorable level

of commercial recreation.

The collection of recreation fees is seen as a somewhat important objective and a somewhat important agency role. Responses to a values statement regarding a payment of $5

extra to use public lands for recreation indicates some agreement, with stronger agreement

in both eastern and western metropolitan areas than in the non-metropolitan areas.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.b: Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas

to sustain a desired range of benefits and values.

The second objective in providing benefits to people is to provide a desired range of

values and benefits from wilderness areas. The VOBA results under this objective are in

table 7.

Generally, the preservation of a “wilderness” experience and the designation of wilderness are seen by the public as at least somewhat important objectives to pursue. Metropolitan residents show the strongest support for this objective in both the East and West. Among

Table 7. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.b.: Improve the capability of wilderness and protected

areas to sustain a desired range of benefits and values. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

6. Designate more wilderness to stop development & motorized

access

3.84

1.41a

3.66

1.46

3.45

1.34

10. Preserve "wilderness" experience 4.15

1.28

4.22

1.14

3.88

1.10

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92

4.53

0.98

3.90

1.16

8. Preserve natural resources through policies such as no timber,

no mining

4.22

1.23

4.21

1.27

3.65

1.31

a

 Standard deviation
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 13

non-metropolitan residents, those in the East show stronger support than those in the West

for the designation of more wilderness. These activities are at least somewhat important

roles for the USDA Forest Service, and the agency is doing a somewhat acceptable job.

The protection of ecosystems and habitats and the restriction of natural resource extraction are also seen as important objectives. The public also sees these activities as appropriate

roles for the USDA Forest Service. Again, where statistically significant differences between demographic groups occur, metropolitan dwellers are more in favor of such policies

than are those living in non-metropolitan areas. The agency is doing a somewhat adequate

job of protecting ecosystems and restricting extractive uses.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.c: Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services.

The third objective supporting the goal of providing benefits to people deals with the

provision of products and services. These results can be found in table 8.

The American public sees the provision of natural resources to communities dependent

on public land outputs as a somewhat important objective. It is not surprising that those in

the non-metropolitan West see this objective as more important than do those in the metropolitan West. The provision of resources is also a somewhat important role for the USDA

Forest Service. Making the permitting process easier for established users could facilitate

the provision of resources to dependent communities, but the public sees this as a slightly

unimportant objective. Those in the non-metropolitan West are also more supportive of relaxing the permitting process. The agency is doing a somewhat favorable job of fulfilling

these objectives.

The preservation of local cultural uses of public lands is a somewhat important objective

for respondents and is believed to be a somewhat important role for the agency. The need to

allow for diverse uses of public lands is an important objective as well as an important

USDA Forest Service role.

Table 8. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.c.: Improve the capability of the Nation's forests and

grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services. Survey items are from

the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.60

1.39a

3.29

1.39

3.45

1.30

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 2.89

1.55

2.90

1.59

3.05

1.43

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38

3.75

1.36

3.39

1.37

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.02

1.14

3.73

1.18

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land (tree planting,

etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.46

1.03

3.85

1.25

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource development 4.26

1.23

4.21

1.19

3.51

1.26

27. Increase total number of acres in the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.81

1.42

3.95

1.47

3.52

1.45

a

 Standard deviation
14 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

While respondents feel that it is an important objective to keep management decisions

local (see table 9), they also feel that it is important to develop a national policy for natural

resource development. Metropolitan dwellers see the development of a national natural resource policy as a more important objective than do non-metropolitan residents. The development of such a policy is viewed as an important role for the USDA Forest Service, which

is seen as doing a somewhat favorable job.

An indirect objective toward improving the provision of goods and services is increasing

the total number of acres in the National Forest System. This objective is seen as somewhat

important by survey respondents, and it is seen as a somewhat important role for the USDA

Forest Service. Easterners and metropolitan residents are more supportive of increasing NFS

acreage. The agency performance is viewed as somewhat favorable.

Table 9. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.d.: Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and

members of underserved and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services.

Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.75

1.36

3.39

1.37

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.60

1.39

3.29

1.39

3.45

1.30

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 2.89

1.55

2.90

1.59

3.05

1.43

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource development 4.26

1.23

4.21

1.19

3.51

1.26

26. Make management decisions at local level (rather than national) 3.93

1.22

3.88

1.34

3.49

1.32

a

 Standard deviation

Strategic Plan Objective 2.d: Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and members of underserved and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services.

Increasing accessibility for populations traditionally underserved by the USDA Forest

Service is the fourth objective under the goal of providing benefits to people. The VOBA

results are presented in table 9.

The preservation of local cultural uses is a somewhat important objective for the public

and a somewhat important role for the agency. Again, while the public sees the provision of

natural resources to dependent communities as a somewhat important objective for public

lands management, they do not see making the permitting process easier as an important

means to achieve this. Easterners, both non-metropolitan and metropolitan, give the agency

a higher rating on providing resources for dependent communities. Metropolitan dwellers in

the East view this as a more important objective than do those in the metropolitan West.

Another interesting finding emerges when examining the level of importance placed on

the objective of making decisions locally rather than nationally and the development of a

national natural resource policy (both are considered at least somewhat important by the

public). Metropolitan residents in both the East and West feel that making a national policy

for resource development is a more important objective and role for the agency than do
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 15

non-metropolitan residents. Among non-metropolitan residents, those in the East are more

in favor of a national policy than those in the West.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.e: Improve delivery of services to urban communities.

The final objective supporting the goal of providing benefits to people is the improvement of delivery of services to urban communities. Table 10 shows the results for the sample

as a whole and broken down according to metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties.

Services to metropolitan areas include the provision of recreational opportunities, which

can be divided into motorized and non-motorized forms. Increasing motorized opportunities can be achieved through the expansion of motorized access and paved roads. All groups

see the expansion of off-highway motorized access as a somewhat unimportant objective

and they all believe it is a somewhat unimportant role for the USDA Forest Service. The

agency is seen as doing a slightly unfavorable job at the national level, while non-metropolitan residents rate the performance as slightly favorable. The development of new paved

roads is also seen as a somewhat unimportant objective by all groups, with the exception of

those in the metropolitan West, who give this objective only a slightly unimportant rating.

All groups view the development of new paved roads as a somewhat unimportant role for

the agency, with the exception of metropolitan westerners who view this role as slightly

important. All groups rate the agency performance as slightly favorable. Providing trails for

motorized vehicles is viewed as a slightly unimportant objective at the national level, with

non-metropolitan residents (particularly those in the East) viewing it as a slightly important

objective. At the national level, trails for motorized vehicles are seen as a slightly unimportant role for the USDA Forest Service. Those in the metropolitan West see this role as more

important than their non-metropolitan western counterparts. Agency performance is seen as

at least slightly favorable by all groups.

Table 10. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 2.e.: Improve delivery of services to urban

communities. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

Survey item number and

statement

Full

sample

Nonmetro MetroFull

sample

Nonmetro MetroFull

sample

Nonmetro Metro

1. Expand off-highway motorized

access

2.41

1.49a

2.47

1.07

2.40

1.71

2.52

1.50

2.68

1.13

2.49

1.66

2.97

1.45

3.03

1.02

2.95

1.68

5. Develop new paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.54

1.11

2.64

1.70

2.70

1.57

2.55

1.03

2.73

1.83

3.19

1.43

3.12

1.00

3.21

1.65

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

3.02

1.08

2.78**

1.65

2.98

1.51

2.92

1.12

3.00

1.72

3.25

1.38

3.24

0.94

3.26

1.58

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.75

1.33

3.48

0.92

3.81***

1.51

3.71

1.37

3.38

1.05

3.78***

1.52

3.59

1.27

3.48

0.98

3.61

1.44

4. Designate trails for specific use 3.59

1.43

3.75

0.99

3.56*

1.64

3.94

1.25

4.08

0.93

3.91

1.41

3.61

1.33

3.75

0.90

3.57*

1.56

10. Preserve "wilderness"

experience

4.15

1.28

4.03

0.95

4.18*

1.44

4.22

1.14

4.10

0.90

4.24

1.26

3.88

1.10

3.89

0.81

3.88

1.24

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.08

1.01

3.04

1.67

3.25

1.53

3.10

1.04

3.28

1.76

3.45

1.24

3.32

0.95

3.48*

1.40 a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 α
16 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Providing trails for non-motorized recreation is seen as a somewhat important objective.

Metropolitan dwellers see this as more important than do non-metropolitan residents in both

the East and West. Among non-metropolitan residents, those in the East are more supportive

of trails for non-motorized recreation than those in the West. This is seen as a somewhat

important role for the USDA Forest Service, again more so by those in metropolitan areas.

Agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

Separating often conflicting motorized and non-motorized uses by designating trails for

specific purposes is a somewhat important objective, with the most support coming from the

non-metropolitan West. This is seen as a somewhat important role for the USDA Forest

Service, again, especially by those in the non-metropolitan West. Agency performance is

somewhat favorable with the strongest support in the non-metropolitan East.

The preservation of a wilderness experience is an important objective for all groups, especially those living in eastern metropolitan areas. All groups see this as an important role

for the agency. An interesting result is the fact that those in the non-metropolitan East see

this as a more important role than do those in the non-metropolitan West. The agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

The public sees the expansion of commercial recreation as a slightly important objective

with the strongest support in the metropolitan West. Commercial recreation is seen as a

slightly important role for the agency. Agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance: Develop and use the best scientific information available to deliver technical and community assistance and to support ecological,

economic, and social sustainability.

This goal states that the USDA Forest Service will develop and use the best scientific

information available to deliver technical and community assistance and to support ecological, economic, and social sustainability.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.a: Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental,

and social change related to natural resources.

Table 11 shows the VOBA results for the first objective under the goal of providing scientific and technical assistance.

This first Strategic Plan objective deals with increasing the ability of tribal governments,

rural communities, and private landowners affected by public land use decisions to adapt to

changes related to these decisions. Objectives that were presented to the NSRE respondents

included several dealing with the provision of information on the impacts and concerns

related to the use of natural resources. Specifically, information on recreation concerns,

information on the environmental impacts of uses, and information on the economic value

of developing natural resources were all seen as important objectives for public land management. Metropolitan residents in both the East and West are more strongly supportive of

providing information about recreation concerns and environmental impacts than are those

in non-metropolitan areas. Regional differences among non-metropolitan residents shows

that those in the East are also more supportive of providing information about environmental impacts than are westerners. Eastern metropolitan residents see the provision of information on the economic value of resource development as a less important objective than those

in the non-metropolitan East. The provision of information is seen as an important role for

the USDA Forest Service by all groups. The agency is seen as performing at least somewhat

favorably by all groups in the role of information dissemination.

NSRE respondents feel that it is an important objective for public land managers to encourage collaboration between groups, with no difference between non-metropolitan and

metropolitan residents. Easterners (both non-metropolitan and metropolitan) are more
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 17

supportive of this objective than westerners. The public also feels that this is an important

role for the USDA Forest Service. Agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

Public involvement in management issues through advisory committees is seen as a somewhat important objective, with slightly stronger support among metropolitan residents. The

use of advisory committees is seen as a somewhat important role for the USDA Forest Service, which is seen as doing a somewhat favorable job in performing this role.

The public feels that it is at least somewhat important that management decisions be

made at the local level. Non-metropolitan residents in the West are most supportive of this as

an important role for the agency, with all groups viewing it as at least somewhat important.

The USDA Forest Service performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

The preservation of local cultural uses of National Forest lands is seen as a somewhat

important objective by all groups. This is also seen as a somewhat important role for the

agency. Agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable by all groups.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.b: Increase the effectiveness of scientific, developmental,

and technical information delivered to domestic and international interests.

The second Strategic Plan objective supporting the goal of providing scientific and technical assistance concerns the effectiveness of such assistance. See table 12 for VOBA items

related to this Strategic Plan objective.

Table 11. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.a.: Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal

governments, rural communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental, and social

change related to natural resources. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

Survey item number and

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

20. Inform public about

recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.43

0.79

4.56*

1.00

4.50

0.93

4.47

0.71

4.51

1.05

3.89

1.31

3.95

0.90

3.88

1.50

21. Inform public on

potential environmental

impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.17

0.87

4.45***

1.10

4.48

1.00

4.36

0.74

4.50*

1.13

3.50

1.33

3.55

0.95

3.49

1.53

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.14

0.82

4.15

1.39

4.15

1.17

4.17

0.83

4.14

1.34

3.72

1.22

3.70

0.88

3.72

1.42

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.90

1.20

3.79

0.90

3.93*

1.36

3.84

1.25

4.02

0.87

3.80*

1.42

3.36

1.26

3.38

0.90

3.35

1.46

26. Make management

decisions at local level

(rather than national)

3.93

1.22

4.03

0.85

3.90

1.40

3.88

1.34

4.14

0.91

3.81**

1.53

3.49

1.32

3.61

0.97

3.47

1.50

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38

3.76

1.00

3.84

1.57

3.75

1.36

3.65

1.06

3.78

1.52

3.39

1.37

3.53

0.96

3.36*

1.58

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 α
18 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

As seen above, the provision of information on recreation concerns, information on the

environmental impacts of uses, and information on the economic value of developing natural resources were all seen as important objectives for public land management. Metropolitan residents in both the East and West are more strongly supportive of providing information about recreation concerns and environmental impacts than are those in non-metropolitan areas. Regional differences among both non-metropolitan and metropolitan residents

shows that those in the East are also more supportive of providing information about environmental impacts than are non-metropolitan westerners. Eastern metropolitan residents see

the provision of information on the economic value of resource development as more important than do those in the non-metropolitan East. The provision of information is seen as an

important role for the USDA Forest Service by all groups. The agency is seen as performing

at least somewhat favorably by all groups in the role of information dissemination.

The public also feels that it is an important objective for public land managers to encourage collaboration between groups, with no difference between non-metropolitan and metropolitan residents. Easterners (both non-metropolitan and metropolitan) are more supportive

of this objective. The public also feels that this is an important role for the USDA Forest

Service.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.c: Improve the knowledge base provided through research,

inventory, and monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including

human uses, and to support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation’s

forests and grasslands.

The provision of scientific and technical assistance includes research efforts to improve

the understanding of ecosystems, as described in the third Strategic Plan objective under this

goal. VOBA results related to this objective can be found in table 13.

Providing the public with information about the human, economic, and environmental

impacts associated with various uses of National Forest lands are all seen as important objectives by the public. The public agrees that the USDA Forest Service is an appropriate

agency to provide this information and they are doing a somewhat adequate job. Similar

results are found for the objective of encouraging collaboration between groups.

Table 12. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.b. Increase the effectiveness of scientific,

developmental, and technical information delivered to domestic and international interests. Survey items

are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

20. Inform public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.50

0.93

3.89

1.31

21. Inform public on potential environmental impacts of uses 4.39

1.02

4.48

1.00

3.50

1.33

22. Inform public on economic value from developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

4.08

1.17

3.40

1.38

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.15

1.17

3.72

1.22

a

 Standard deviation
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 19

Strategic Plan Objective 3.d: Broaden the participation of less traditional research groups

in research and technical assistance programs.

The final objective under the goal of providing scientific and technical assistance is to

broaden participation in research and technical assistance programs. Table 14 shows the

VOBA results for this Strategic Plan objective.

The public feels that it is an important objective for public land managers to encourage

collaboration between groups, with no difference between non-metropolitan and metropolitan residents. Easterners (both non-metropolitan and metropolitan) are more supportive of

this objective. The public also feels that this is an important role for the USDA Forest Service. Agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable.

Table 14. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.d. Broaden the participation of less traditional

research groups in research and technical assistance programs. Survey item is from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share information 4.15

1.20a

4.15

1.17

3.72

1.22

a

 Standard deviation

Goal 4: Effective Public Service: Ensure the acquisition and use of an appropriate

corporate infrastructure to enable the efficient delivery of a variety of uses.

The USDA Forest Service will ensure the acquisition and use of an appropriate corporate

infrastructure to enable the efficient delivery of a variety of uses. To meet the goal of effective public service the USDA Forest Service has described six objectives. Three of these can

be addressed using the VOBA results.

Table 13. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 3.c.: Improve the knowledge base provided through

research, inventory, and monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including human uses,

and to support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation's forests and grasslands. Survey

items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

20. Inform public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.50

0.93

3.89

1.31

21. Inform public on potential environmental impacts of uses 4.39

1.02

4.48

1.00

3.50

1.33

22. Inform public on economic value from developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

4.08

1.17

3.40

1.38

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.15

1.17

3.72

1.22

a

 Standard deviation
20 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 4.a: Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability.

The first objective is to improve the financial management to achieve fiscal accountability (table 15).

One of the issues associated with a lack of fiscal accountability has been the subsidization

of extractive uses of public lands. The public does not support the continuation of such

subsidies, as indicated by the fact that they disagree somewhat with the values in table 15. It

is interesting to note that those in the non-metropolitan West are less supportive of resource

development subsidies than those in the non-metropolitan East. Similarly surprising, metropolitan westerners are more in favor of continuing such subsidies than are non-metropolitan

westerners.

Strategic Plan Objective 4.b: Improve the safety and economy of USDA Forest Service

roads, trails, facilities, and operations and provide greater security for the public and

employees.

A second objective supporting the improvement of public service is to increase the safety

and economy of USDA Forest Service facilities (see table 16).

Table 16. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.b.: Improve the safety and economy of USDA Forest

Service roads, trails, facilities, and operations and provide greater security for the public and employees.

Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve facilities (trails,

etc.)

4.18

1.13a

4.22

1.09

3.79

1.21

20. Inform public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.50

0.93

3.89

1.31

29. Increasing law enforcement on National Forests and

Grasslands

4.01

1.21

4.01

1.26

3.85

1.27

a

 Standard deviation

Table 15. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.a.: Improve financial management to achieve fiscal

accountability. Survey item is from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

24. The Federal government should

subsidize development and

leasing of public lands

2.32

1.58a

2.33

1.15

2.28

1.73

2.09

0.98

2.42**

1.95

2.33

1.15

2.09*

0.98

2.28

1.73

2.42

1.95

a Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 α
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 21

The public finds the development of volunteer programs to assist with facilities maintenance to be an important objective for public land management. The strongest support for

this objective appears in the West. The public also believes that the development of such

programs is an important role for the USDA Forest Service. Agency performance in this area

is seen as somewhat favorable.

The need to inform the public about recreation concerns such as safety is seen as an

important objective, especially by metropolitan residents. This is also seen as an important

role for the agency. The USDA Forest Service is seen as doing a somewhat favorable job in

providing information about recreation concerns.

Furthermore, the public sees an increase in law enforcement on National Forest lands as

an important objective and as an important role for the agency. In the west, metropolitan

residents are more supportive of increased law enforcement. Again, the agency performance

is rated as somewhat favorable by all groups.

Strategic Plan Objective 4.f: Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands

and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs.

Providing access is the final objective under the goal of improving public service. VOBA

results for this objective are presented in table 17.

The public finds the preservation of local cultural uses to be a somewhat important objective for public lands. This is also seen as an appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service,

with the strongest support in the West coming from metropolitan areas. Agency performance

is viewed as somewhat favorable.

Providing natural resources to dependent communities is seen as a somewhat important

objective, while relaxing the permitting process is seen as slightly unimportant. Those in the

non-metropolitan West show the strongest support for providing resources to dependent

communities, while among metropolitan dwellers, easterners are more supportive than

Table 17. National mean scores for Strategic Plan Objective 4.f.: Provide appropriate access to National Forest

System lands and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs. Survey

items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

Survey item number and

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

Full

sample Non-metro Metro

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.76

1.00

3.84

1.57

3.75

1.36

3.65

1.06

3.78

1.52

3.39

1.37

3.53

0.96

3.36*

1.58

12. Provide natural resources

to dependent communities

3.60

1.39

3.69

0.99

3.58

1.59

3.29

1.39

3.31

1.00

3.29

1.58

3.45

1.30

3.32

0.96

3.48*

1.47

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

2.95

1.12

2.88

1.77

2.90

1.59

2.94

1.14

2.89

1.83

3.05

1.43

3.19

1.05

3.01*

1.65

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.04

1.45

3.08

1.01

3.04

1.67

3.25

1.53

3.10

1.04

3.28

1.76

3.45

1.24

3.32

0.95

3.48*

1.40

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.04

0.91

4.08

1.30

4.02

1.14

4.07

0.86

4.01

1.29

3.73

1.18

3.73

0.86

3.73

1.36

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 α
22 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

westerners. Respondents believe that providing resources to dependent communities is a

somewhat appropriate role for the agency, while relaxing the permitting process is a slightly

unimportant role. Again, in the West, those in non-metropolitan areas are most supportive of

the role of providing resources. Agency performance is at least slightly favorable for these

objectives.

The expansion of commercial recreation is a slightly important objective. This is seen as

a slightly important role for the USDA Forest Service. The agency’s performance is rated as

somewhat favorable. Overall, allowing for diverse uses of public lands is seen as an important objective by most groups. This is an important role for the agency, who is viewed as

doing a somewhat favorable job.

C. Survey Results for the Public Lands Values (PLV)

This section presents the items in the values section grouped in a manner that is consistent

with factor analysis conducted on prior data sets. Specifically, these items have been grouped

into two subsets: Socially Responsible Individual Values and Socially Responsible Management Values. A subset of NSRE respondents were asked the full set of values items. This

subset was then used to conduct factor analysis, which confirmed the existence of the two

factors. The full demographic breakdowns for the Public Lands Values can be found in

Appendix H.

Respondents were asked to rate their values for public lands (see Appendix B for the 25-

item scale). This scale has been used in numerous contexts related to public land studies

both at the regional and at the national level. The objective of this scale is to identify and

better understand the basic underlying values that guide public land and natural resource

use, management, and conservation. Based on numerous pretests, it has been determined

that the values scale items can be divided into two subsets, with 17 items grouped under the

heading of Socially Responsible Individual Values (SRIV) and eight items grouped under

the heading of Socially Responsible Management Values (SRMV). As the name indicates,

the set of values that loaded on SRIV provide information about a respondent’s personal

values related to public lands. A lower group mean indicates a more instrumental (or anthropocentric) view of nature, while a higher group mean implies a more biocentric perspective.

The values grouped under the SRMV heading provide information about a respondent’s

views on how public lands should be managed. Here a lower group mean indicates a strong

conservation/preservation ethic, while a higher group mean implies stronger support for

resource development/consumption.

The means for each of the two values factors are 4.16 out of 5.0 for SRIV and 2.94 out of

5.0 for SRMV. Individual values scale item means are reported in table 18.

These SRIV results indicate that the public has a strong orientation toward environmental

protection. The SRMV results indicate that the public holds a moderately strong conservation/preservation ethic, but that they also support some degree of development. For example, the NSRE score of 4.00 on SRMV item 4 indicates that the general public is interested in the option value of forests and grasslands, e.g., they want to preserve the option to

utilize forests and grasslands in the future.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 23

Table 18. National mean scores for individual values scale items. Items are from the VOBA module of the 

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

A. Group 1 - Socially Responsible Individual Values Mean

1. People should be more concerned about how public lands are used 4.75a

0.72b

2. Natural resources must be preserved, even if some people must do without 4.14

1.22

3. Consumers should be interested in environmental consequences of purchases 4.47

1.05

4. I would be willing to sign a petition for an environmental cause 4.03

1.43

5r.c The whole pollution issue has upset me, I feel it’s not overrated (r) 3.68

1.51

6. If we could just get by with less, more for future generations 3.99

1.35

7. Manufacturers should be encouraged to use recycled materials 4.69

0.82

8. Future generations should be as important as current in public lands decisions 4.52

0.97

9. I would pay $5 more to use public lands for recreation 3.49

1.60

10. People should urge friends to limit use of scarce resources 4.14

1.25

11. I am glad there are National Forests even if I never see them 4.66

0.91

12. People can think public lands are valuable even if they don’t go there 4.46

1.07

13. I am willing to stop buying from polluting companies 3.95

1.35

14. I am willing to make personal sacrifices to slow pollution)

4.44

1.05

15. Forests have a right to exist for their own sake 4.11

1.28

16. Wildlife, plants, and humans have equal rights 4.28

1.26

17. Donating time or money to worthy causes is important to me 4.25

1.05

Group Mean 4.24

B. Group 2 - Socially Responsible Management Values Mean

1. We should actively harvest more trees for larger human population 2.88a

1.77b

2. The most important role for public lands is providing jobs, income for locals 3.23

1.53

3. The decision to develop resources should be made mostly on economic grounds 2.92

1.51

4. The main reason for maintaining resources now is to develop in future 4.00

1.39

continued on next page
24 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

D. Survey Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Grouped

by the Focus Group’s Strategic Level Objectives

This subsection presents the survey results for the objectives, beliefs and attitudes data

grouped according to overarching strategic objectives expressed by the public in the focus

groups. These overarching objectives are: Access, Preservation/Conservation, Economic

Development, Education, and Natural Resource Management. Results organized according

to these strategic level objectives and broken down by demographic subsets are presented in

Appendix I.

Based upon the results of the focus group interviews, an objectives hierarchy was constructed for each group. These hierarchies indicated what each group or individual was attempting to achieve and how they would achieve each goal or objective. These objectives

ranged from the very abstract strategic level to the more focused or concrete means level.

The means level objectives are at the bottom of the hierarchy while the strategic objective is

at the top. Fundamental objectives between the means level and the strategic level completed the hierarchies. (See Figure 1 on page 5.)

Each of the objectives hierarchies was confirmed with its respective group so as to ensure

that it accurately reflected their goals and objectives. A combined objectives hierarchy was

then constructed that included all the objectives stated by each group or individual

interviewed. The result was a hierarchy that covered five strategic level objectives related to

access, preservation/conservation, commodity development, education and natural resource

management. These five strategic level objectives were supported by 30 higher-level fundamental objectives.

The 30 fundamental level objectives were used to develop the 30 objectives statements

used in the NSRE survey. The 30 objectives statements were divided into five groups based

upon the strategic level objectives that the focus groups had identified. During the telephone

interviews each respondent was asked one statement from each of the five strategic level

groups in order to obtain a statistically valid sample for each statement and for each strategic

level group. The specific objectives hierarchy for the NSRE is presented in table 19.

Table 18. Continued.

5. I think public land managers are doing an adequate job of protecting natural resources 3.18

1.31

6. The primary use of forests should be for products useful for humans 2.95

1.64

7. The Federal government should subsidize development and leasing of public lands 2.32

1.58

8. The government has better places to spend money than on strong conservation program 2.33

1.48

Group Mean 2.98 a

 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree

b

 Standard deviation

c Values statement 5 has been reverse scored in order to calculate a group mean. See Appendix A for an explanation of reverse scoring
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 25

Table 19. Objectives hierarchy for the NSRE.

Strategic Objective 1: Access

Fundamental Objective 1 Expanding access for motorized off-highway vehicles on forests and grasslands

(for example snowmobiling or 4-wheel driving).

Fundamental Objective 2 Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and

private land for motorized vehicles such as snowmobiles or ATVs.

Fundamental Objective 3 Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and

private land for non-motorized recreation such as hiking and cross-country

skiing.

Fundamental Objective 4 Designating some existing recreation trails for specific uses (for example,

creating separate trails for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing, or for

mountain biking and horseback riding).

Fundamental Objective 5 Developing new paved roads on forests and grasslands for access for cars and

recreational vehicles

Fundamental Objective 6 Designating more wilderness areas on public land that stops access for

development and motorized uses.

Strategic Objective 2: Preservation/Conservation

Fundamental Objective 7 Conserving and protecting forests and grasslands that are the source of our

water resources, such as streams, lakes, and watershed areas.

Fundamental Objective 8 Preserving the natural resources of forests and grasslands through such policies

as no timber harvesting or mining.

Fundamental Objective 9 Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitats.

Fundamental Objective 10 Preserving the ability to have a wilderness experience on forests and

grasslands.

Fundamental Objective 11 Preserving the cultural uses of forests and grasslands by Native Americans and

Native Hispanics such as firewood gathering, herb/berry/plant gathering, and

ceremonial access.

Strategic Objective 3: Economic Development

Fundamental Objective 12 Providing natural resources from forests and grasslands to support communities

depending on grazing, mining, or timber harvesting.

Fundamental Objective 13 Restricting mineral development on forests and grasslands.

Fundamental Objective 14 Restricting timber harvesting and grazing on forests and grasslands.

continued on next page

Fundamental Objective 15 Making the permitting process easier for some established uses of forests and

grasslands such as grazing, mining, and commercial recreation.

Fundamental Objective 16 Developing a national policy that guides natural resource development of all

kinds (for example, specifies levels of extraction and regulates environmental

impacts).

Fundamental Objective 17 Expanding commercial recreation on forests and grasslands (for example, ski

areas, guide services, or outfitters).
26 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Access

Items dealing with access are those that refer to expanding off-highway motorized access

and paved roads, increasing trails for motorized and non-motorized recreation, and designating separate trails for specific uses. The results for this group are in table 20.

Noteworthy is the difference the between how respondents feel about motorized access

and how they feel about non-motorized access. Respondents view the objectives of expansion of off-highway motorized access and the development of new paved roads to be somewhat unimportant objectives and the provision of trails for motorized access to be slightly

unimportant. Contrast this with the provision of non-motorized access, which is viewed as a

somewhat important objective for respondents. The public’s beliefs about these activities as

roles for the USDA Forest Service parallel their objectives, with motorized access being a slightly

or somewhat unimportant role and non-motorized access being a somewhat important role.

Motorized and non-motorized activities can often come into conflict, and the public sees

the designation of trails for specific uses as a somewhat important objective and a somewhat

important role for the agency. Wilderness designation also impacts access and the public

feels that additional designations are a somewhat important objective.

Table 19. Continued.

Strategic Objective 4: Education

Fundamental Objective 18 Developing volunteer programs to improve forests and grasslands (for

example, planting trees, or improving water quality).

Fundamental Objective 19 Developing volunteer programs to maintain trails and facilities on forests and

grasslands (for example, trail maintenance or campground maintenance).

Fundamental Objective 20 Informing the public about recreation concerns on forests and grasslands such

as safety, trail etiquette, and respect for wildlife.

Fundamental Objective 21 Informing the public on the potential environmental impacts of all uses

associated with forests and grasslands.

Fundamental Objective 22 Informing the public on the economic value received by developing our natural

resources.

Fundamental Objective 23 Encouraging collaboration between groups in order to share information

concerning uses of forests and grasslands.

Strategic Objective 5: Natural Resource Management

Fundamental Objective 24 Using public advisory committees to advise on public land management issues.

Fundamental Objective 25 Allowing for diverse uses of forests and grasslands such as grazing, recreation,

and wildlife habitat.

Fundamental Objective 26 Making management decisions concerning the use of forests and grasslands at

the local level rather than at the national level.

Fundamental Objective 27 Increasing the total number of acres in the public land system.

Fundamental Objective 28 Paying an entry fee that goes to support public land.

Fundamental Objective 29 Increasing law enforcement efforts by public land agencies on public lands.

Fundamental Objective 30 Allowing public land managers to trade public lands for private lands (for

example, to eliminate private property within public land boundaries, or to

acquire unique areas of land).
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 27

Some regional differences do occur. In the East, non-metropolitan residents are more

likely to support the expansion of trails for motorized vehicles. In the West, it is metropolitan residents who are most in favor of trails for non-motorized recreation and the development of new paved roads. In the West, non-metropolitan residents see the designation of

specific-use trails to be a more important objective than do their metropolitan counterparts.

Among metropolitan residents, westerners are slightly more supportive of the expansion of

off-highway motorized access.

Agency performance is rated as at least slightly favorable, with the exception of the expansion of off-highway motorized access, which is rated as slightly unfavorable. This may

indicate that the public sees the agency as providing too much of this type of access, since

they find this to be both an unimportant role and an unimportant objective.

Preservation/Conservation

These next items represent the strategic level objective dealing with preservation of wildlands and conservation of natural resources. Table 21 shows the results for this group.

It is interesting to note that the public feels that the conservation and protection of watersheds is an important objective, consistent with the USDA Forest Service Organic Act. Also,

important objectives for the public are the preservation of natural resources through policies

that restrict commodity uses, protection of ecosystems and wildlife habitat, and preservation

of the ability to enjoy a “wilderness” experience. A somewhat important objective is the

preservation of local cultural uses.

As with the “Access” items, the public’s beliefs about the role the USDA Forest Service

should play in fulfilling these objectives mirror their opinions about the objectives importance. And as before, the agency performance is rated as somewhat favorable for most items.

Metropolitan residents in both the East and West are more in favor of policies that restrict

timber and mineral extraction. Metropolitan dwellers in the West see protection of ecosystems as a more important objective than do non-metropolitan westerners. Looking at nonmetropolitan residents, those in the East are more likely to favor the protection of ecosystems. Metropolitan dwellers in the East place a higher rating on the preservation of a “wilderness experience” than western metropolitan residents.

Table 20. National mean scores for access. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.41

1.49a

2.52

1.50

2.97

1.45

2. Increase trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

2.98

1.51

3.25

1.38

3. Increase trails for non-motorized recreation 3.75

1.33

3.71

1.37

3.59

1.27

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.59

1.43

3.94

1.25

3.61

1.33

5. Develop more paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.70

1.57

3.19

1.43

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.84

1.41

3.66

1.46

3.45

1.34

a Standard deviation
28 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Economic Development

Development of economically valuable resources is the third strategic level objective.

VOBA items that are related to this objective are presented in table 22.

These items deal with commodity development and commercial uses of public lands. All

the items in this objective are seen as at least slightly important objectives, with the exception of making the permitting process easier, which is viewed as slightly unimportant. The

development of a national policy for natural resource development is seen as the most important of the items in this objective. The public sees the restriction of mineral development

and of timber harvest and grazing as being more important than the provision of natural

resources to dependent communities (although this is still seen as somewhat important).

Least important are the easing of permit processes and the expansion of commercial

recreation. Residents of metropolitan areas are more in favor of a national policy for natural

resource development than are non-metropolitan residents in both the East and West.

Table 21. National mean scores for preservation/conservation. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.73

0.76a

4.61

0.83

3.91

1.17

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

4.21

1.27

3.65

1.31

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92

4.53

0.98

3.90

1.16

10. Preserve "wilderness" experience 4.15

1.28

4.22

1.14

3.88

1.10

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38

3.75

1.36

3.39

1.37 a Standard deviation

Table 22. National mean scores for economic development. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.60

1.39a

3.29

1.39

3.45

1.30

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.96

1.42

3.95

1.43

3.30

1.50

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.99

1.27

3.94

1.34

3.50

1.36

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 2.89

1.55

2.90

1.59

3.05

1.43

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource

development

4.26

1.23

4.21

1.19

3.51

1.26

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.25

1.53

3.45

1.24 a Standard deviation
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 29

Education

Respondents express a fourth strategic level objective concerning education and the distribution of information. These results are presented in table 23.

All of the items in this strategic level objective are considered to be important objectives

by the public. The public also feels that fulfilling these objectives are important roles for the

USDA Forest Service to play. Agency performance in this area is rated as somewhat favorable by the public.

There are few striking demographic differences with this strategic level objective. One

that stands out is the fact that metropolitan residents (both easterners and westerners) are

more in favor of informing the public about potential environmental impacts of uses of

public lands than are non-metropolitan residents. Among residents of metropolitan areas,

those in the East see this objective as more important than metropolitan westerner.

Table 23. National mean scores for education. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

land (tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86a

4.46

1.03

3.85

1.25

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.22

1.09

3.79

1.21

20. Inform the public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.50

0.93

3.89

1.31

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.48

1.00

3.50

1.33

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.02

1.30

4.08

1.17

3.40

1.38

23. Encourage collaboration between groups

to share information

4.15

1.20

4.15

1.17

3.72

1.22

a Standard deviation

Natural Resource Management

The management of natural resources is also an important strategic level objective expressed by focus group participants. Items that relate to this objective appear in table 24.

Public input into natural resource management decisions is of interest to survey respondents, with both the use of public advisory committees and local level decision making

being somewhat important objectives. Allowing for diverse uses is also an important objective. These items are also seen as appropriate roles for the USDA Forest Service.

Increasing the total number of acres in the National Forest and Grassland system is somewhat important to the public, while land trades to eliminate inholdings is slightly important.

Both of these items are seen as somewhat important roles for the agency.

Increasing law enforcement on USDA Forest Service lands is an important objective.

Collection of an entry fee is somewhat important as well. Agency performance in each of

these areas is at least slightly favorable.
30 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

E. Survey Values, Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes

Linked to the Level of Respondent Familiarity

 With the USDA Forest Service

This section contains results for 5,064 respondents who were asked questions designed to

ascertain their familiarity with the USDA Forest Service. These questions were a set of five

statements pertaining to management roles and characteristics of the USDA Forest Service.

Respondents were asked to give “yes/no” answers (essentially “true/false”). The exact wording

of the familiarity questions can be found in Appendix F.

Responses to these five questions were coded to indicate whether the respondent gave a

correct answer. The total number of correct answers was then tallied, and finally a variable

indicating the level of familiarity was constructed based on the number of correct answers. A

respondent was classified as having “high familiarity” if he/she correctly answered four or

Table 24. National mean scores for natural resource management. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Survey item number and statement

Objectives

for the management of

forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important,

 5=very important)

Beliefs about the role of the

 USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree)

Attitudes

about the performance

of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable,

5=very favorable)

24. Using public advisory committees to advise

on management issues

3.90

1.20a

3.84

1.25

3.36

1.26

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.02

1.14

3.73

1.18

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.93

1.22

3.88

1.34

3.49

1.32

27. Increase total number of acres in the

National Forest and Grassland system

3.81

1.42

3.95

1.47

3.52

1.45

28. Collect an entry fee to support National

Forests and Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.69

1.43

3.61

1.36

29. Increasing law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.21

4.01

1.26

3.85

1.27

30. Trade public lands for private to eliminate

inholdings, acquire unique lands

3.05

1.48

3.22

1.49

3.22

1.27

a Standard deviation

Table 25. Demographics by familiarity with the USDA Forest Service. Results are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Low familiarity Moderate familiarity High familiarity

Significant difference

Source of difference

Age

40.58

24.28a

44.08

17.77

44.37

13.63

***

those with low familiarity

are different from rest

Income $44,966

$40,750

$61,027

$22,9363

$62,445

$50,806

Education level b 2.14

1.43

2.68

1.22

3.17

1.05

***

all

a Standard deviation

b Education categories: 1=less than high school, 2=high school graduate, 3=some college, 4=bachelor s degree, 5=post graduate degree

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 α
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 31

five of the questions. Respondents who correctly answered two or three were classified as

having “moderate familiarity” and those who answered one or fewer were classified as having

“low familiarity.” Demographic descriptions of the three familiarity groups are in table 25.

These results will be presented using the same item groupings as above: first by Strategic

Plan objectives, then the Public Lands Values, and finally by Strategic Level Objectives.

1. VOBA Results Linked to USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan Objectives

by Familiarity

Generally, when a statistically significant difference between respondents with high familiarity and those with low or moderate familiarity is found, it is the case that those with

lower familiarity have the higher response. This is especially noteworthy when looking at

the items dealing with attitudes about the performance of the USDA Forest Service. It would

appear that those less familiar with the agency are more likely to give the agency higher

performance ratings and to rate all objectives as important for themselves and as agency

roles, “yeah-saying” if you will.

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health: Promote ecosystem health and conservation using a collaborative approach to sustain the Nation’s forests, grasslands, and watersheds.

The USDA Forest Service will promote ecosystem health and conservation using a collaborative approach to sustain the Nation’s forests, grasslands, and watersheds. Supporting

this goal are three specific objectives.

Strategic Plan Objective 1.a: Improve and protect watershed conditions to provide the

water quality and quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended beneficial water uses.

The first objective supporting ecosystem health deals with protecting water and soil resources. The public responses for the items in the VOBA that support this objective, categorized by respondent familiarity, are in table 26.

The development of volunteer programs to improve the land is most strongly supported

by those with a moderate level of agency familiarity, and the least support is found among

those with a lower level of familiarity (however, these respondents give the most favorable

rating of agency performance).

Table 26. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 1.a.: Improve and protect watershed

conditions to provide the water quality and quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological

functions and intended beneficial water uses. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey

on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.73

0.76a

4.70

0.87

4.72

0.71

4.74

0.68

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.41

1.13

4.62

0.80

4.50

0.85

*

L-Mb

continued on next page
32 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 1.b: Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management

Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species.

Habitat protection is the second objective under the goal of ecosystem health. Responses

by familiarity are presented in table 27.

Here it is interesting to note that those respondents with lower agency familiarity are the

least in favor of restricting mineral development. When asked about policies that preserve

natural resources through no timber harvesting and no mining, however, those with the highest

degree of agency familiarity are least in favor.

Table 27. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 1.b.: Provide ecological conditions to

sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management

Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop development & motorized

access

3.84

1.41a

3.65

1.67

3.83

1.30

3.99

1.14

8. Preserve natural resources through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

4.18

1.46

4.31

1.07

3.99

1.14

*

M-H

continued on next page

Table 26. Continued. 

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.41

1.30

4.54

0.85

4.52

0.83

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 3.91

1.17

3.97

1.37

3.95

1.06

3.67

1.03

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

4.16

1.41

3.82

1.17

3.30

1.13

***

L-M, H;

M-H a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.61

0.83

4.60

0.88

4.62

0.79

4.61

0.64


USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 33

Strategic Plan Objective 1.c: Increase the amount of forests and grasslands restored to

or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and

diseases, and invasive species.

The restoration and maintenance of ecosystem health is the third objective under ecosystem management. The results by familiarity level are shown in table 28.

The least amount of support for volunteer programs to improve the land comes from those

with the lowest level of agency familiarity. And as noted above, those with the lowest familiarity

with the USDA Forest Service offer the highest approval rating for these items.

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop development & motorized

access

3.66

1.46

3.57

1.50

3.71

1.39

3.61

1.39

8. Preserve natural resources through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.23

1.31

4.22

1.09

3.98

1.22

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.53

0.98

4.40

1.26

4.55

0.91

4.23

1.24

*

M-H

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.95

1.43

3.57

1.81

4.01

1.34

3.96

1.22

**

L-M

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.94

1.34

3.90

1.41

4.08

1.21

3.77

1.26

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop development & motorized

access

3.45

1.34

3.48

1.35

3.30

1.30

3.16

1.21

8. Preserve natural resources through policies such as no

timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.81

1.33

3.74

1.21

3.56

1.13

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 3.90

1.16

4.13

1.30

4.02

1.01

3.52

1.14

***

H-L,

Mb

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.30

1.50

3.25

1.58

3.33

1.49

3.08

1.28

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.50

1.36

3.63

1.50

3.42

1.28

3.09

1.15

*

L-H

a

 Standard deviation

Table 27. Continued. 

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92

4.48

1.19

4.59

0.84

4.55

0.88

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.96

1.42

3.51

1.87

4.14

1.19

3.97

1.08

***

L-M,

H

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.99

1.27

4.00

1.41

4.05

1.18

3.76

1.22

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
34 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People: Provide a variety of uses, values, products, and

services for present and future generations by managing within the capability of sustainable

ecosystems.

The second broad goal outlined in the Strategic Plan deals with the provisions of benefits

to the American public. The USDA Forest Service seeks to provide for a variety of uses,

values, products, and services for present and future generations by managing within the

capability of sustainable ecosystems. This goal is supported by five specific objectives.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.a: Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities.

The first Strategic Plan objective deals with providing outdoor recreation opportunities to

the public. The NSRE results by level of agency familiarity are presented in table 29.

Table 28. Means by respondent familiarity - Strategic Plan Objective 1.c.: Increase the amount of forests and

grasslands restored to or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects

and diseases, and invasive species. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

 Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92a

4.48

1.19

4.59

0.84

4.55

0.88

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.41

1.13

4.62

0.80

4.50

0.85

*

L-Mb

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.53

0.98

4.40

1.26

4.55

0.91

4.23

1.24

*

M-H

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.41

1.30

4.54

0.85

4.52

0.83

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 3.90

1.16

4.13

1.30

4.02

1.01

3.52

1.14

***

H-L,M

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve

the land (tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

4.16

1.41

3.82

1.17

3.30

1.13

***

L-M, H;

M-H a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 35

Members of the public with a high degree of agency familiarity have the lowest level of

support for expanded off-highway motorized recreation and adding new paved roads, while

those with moderate familiarity are most in favor of trails for non-motorized recreation.

Those with a high level of familiarity see the expansion of motorized access and commercial

recreation as less appropriate roles for the USDA Forest Service than do those who are less

familiar. Expanded commercial recreation is least supported by the group most familiar with

the agency. Also, those with a higher level of agency awareness offer the least support for

collecting an entrance fee for National Forests and Grasslands.

As we have seen with other items, where a difference in attitudes exists, those who are

least familiar with the agency tend to rate the performance higher than those who are more

familiar, with the exception of providing trails for non-motorized access.

Table 29. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.a.: Improve the capability of the

Nation's forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities. Survey items

are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.41

1.49a

2.41

1.86

2.45

1.40

2.04

1.13

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

2.98

1.51

2.83

1.39

2.99

1.49

3. Trails for non-motorized recreation 3.75

1.33

3.49

1.36

3.82

1.24

3.50

1.13

**

L-M

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.59

1.43

3.68

1.58

3.61

1.37

3.34

1.16

5. Develop new paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.91

1.75

2.57

1.39

2.17

1.14

***

L-M, H

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.32

1.76

2.85

1.25

2.76

1.12

***

L-M, H

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.09

1.47

4.19

1.02

4.20

0.88

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-M

28. Collect an entrance fee to support National

Forests and Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.43

1.76

3.81

1.21

2.94

1.23

***

M-L, H

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.52

1.50

2.52

1.60

2.60

1.43

2.01

1.07

**

H-L, Mb

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.98

1.51

3.20

1.62

2.92

1.45

2.65

1.13

*

L-H

3. Trails for non-motorized recreation 3.71

1.37

3.77

1.60

3.67

1.34

3.47

1.13

continued on next page
36 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table 29. Continued.

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.97

1.45

3.16

1.63

2.90

1.38

3.10

1.16

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 3.25

1.38

3.39

1.48

3.35

1.28

2.98

1.01 *

3. Trails for non-motorized recreation 3.59

1.27

3.47

1.42

3.73

1.19

3.24

0.88

*

M-H

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.61

1.33

3.44

1.48

3.71

1.11

3.39

1.06

*

L-M

5. Develop new paved roads 3.19

1.43

3.33

1.71

3.18

1.32

3.01

1.10

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.45

1.24

3.47

1.37

3.54

1.21

3.36

0.99

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

3.79

1.21

4.09

1.14

3.82

1.09

3.57

1.02

**

L-M, H

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

28. Collect an entrance fee to support National

Forests and Grasslands

3.61

1.36

3.85

1.41

3.52

1.30

3.24

0.88

*

L-M, H

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

9. I would pay $5 more to use public lands for

recreation

3.49

1.60

3.53

1.87

3.51

1.53

3.38

1.31

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.94

1.25

3.88

1.50

4.00

1.10

3.57

1.10

*

M-H

5. Develop new paved roads 2.70

1.57

2.89

1.83

2.57

1.42

1.92

0.97

***

L-M, H;

M-H

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.25

1.53

3.13

1.59

3.24

1.44

2.78

1.26

*

M-H

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.24

1.15

4.28

0.99

4.14

0.85

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

28. Collect an entrance fee to support National

Forests and Grasslands

3.69

1.43

3.84

1.54

3.74

1.26

3.31

1.19

*

H-L, M


USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 37

Strategic Plan Objective 2.b: Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas

to sustain a desired range of benefits and values.

The second objective under “providing benefits to people” is to provide a desired range of

values and benefits from wilderness areas. Table 30 shows the results by familiarity for

these items.

Table 30. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2. b.: Improve the capability of

wilderness and protected areas to sustain a desired range of benefits and values. Survey items are from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.84

1.41a

3.65

1.67

3.83

1.30

3.99

1.14

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

4.18

1.46

4.31

1.07

3.99

1.14

*

M-Hb

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92

4.48

1.19

4.59

0.84

4.55

0.88

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.15

1.28

3.99

1.42

4.16

1.18

3.96

1.09

VOBA Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.66

1.46

3.57

1.50

3.71

1.39

3.61

1.39

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.23

1.31

4.22

1.09

3.98

1.22

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.53

0.98

4.40

1.26

4.55

0.91

4.23

1.24

*

M-H

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.22

1.14

4.06

1.29

4.32

1.05

4.12

1.08

**

L-M

VOBA Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.45

1.34

3.48

1.35

3.30

1.30

3.16

1.21

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.81

1.33

3.74

1.21

3.56

1.13

9. Protect ecosystems and wildlife habitat 3.90

1.16

4.13

1.30

4.02

1.01

3.52

1.14

***

H-L, M

10. Preserve wilderness experience 3.88

1.10

3.80

1.25

3.93

1.06

3.72

0.85 a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
38 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Respondents with lower familiarity feel that the preservation of a wilderness experience

is less important as an agency activity. It is surprising that more familiar respondents feel

that protection of ecosystems and wildlife habitat is less important as an agency role than do

those less familiar. Agency performance is rated higher for habitat and ecosystem protection

by those least familiar with the agency.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.c: Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services.

This objective deals with the provision of products and services to the public. A breakdown of the NSRE responses by familiarity is in table 31.

 Table 31. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.c.: Improve the capability of the

Nation's forests and grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services.

Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.85

1.54

3.71

1.35

3.73

1.16

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.60

1.39

3.67

1.39

3.58

1.39

3.31

1.24

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 2.89

1.55

3.40

1.69

2.81

1.44

2.57

1.26

***

L-M,

Hb

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource development 4.26

1.23

4.28

1.31

4.27

1.12

4.33

1.05

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve the land (tree

planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.41

1.13

4.62

0.80

4.50

0.85

*

L-M

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

3.94

1.42

4.15

1.05

3.91

0.91 *

27. Increase the total number of acres in the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.81

1.42

4.02

1.36

3.66

1.38

3.59

1.23

*

L-M

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.89

1.52

3.74

1.31

3.50

1.10

*

L-H

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.29

1.39

3.46

1.43

3.38

1.31

3.12

1.09

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 2.90

1.59

2.70

1.81

2.77

1.43

2.45

1.40

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource development 4.21

1.19

4.04

1.48

4.28

1.11

4.05

1.00

*

L-M

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve the land (tree

planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.41

1.30

4.54

0.85

4.52

0.83

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 39

Less familiar members of the public feel that making the permitting process easier is a

more important objective. Interestingly, less familiar respondents are more supportive of

increasing the number of acres in the National Forest System but are less likely to feel that

this is an appropriate agency role. Here again, less familiar respondents give the USDA

Forest Service a higher performance rating than do those with a higher degree of agency

familiarity.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.d: Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and members of under served and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services.

Increased accessibility for traditionally underserved populations is the fourth objective

under the goal of providing benefits to people. Table 32 contains the NSRE results by USDA

Forest Service familiarity.

Less familiar respondents see the easing of the permitting process as a slightly important

objective, while those with the most agency familiarity see it as somewhat unimportant.

This result needs to be qualified with the realization that respondents who are less familiar

with the USDA Forest Service may also be unfamiliar with the permitting process. Less

familiar respondents feel that the preservation of local cultural uses is a more important role

for the agency than do those with more familiarity. Local decision making is seen as a more

important agency function by low or moderately familiar respondents. And as before, attitudes

about agency performance are most favorable among least familiar members of the public.

Table 31. Continued.

 Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.59

1.25

3.46

1.30

3.32

0.98

12. Provide natural resources to dependent communities 3.45

1.30

3.21

1.53

3.54

1.16

2.90

1.09

***

M-L, H

15. Make the permitting process easier for established uses 3.05

1.43

3.08

1.75

3.10

1.34

2.60

0.97

16. Develop a national policy for natural resource development 3.51

1.26

3.71

1.30

3.53

1.17

3.46

1.12

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve the land (tree

planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

4.16

1.41

3.82

1.17

3.30

1.13

***

L-M, H;

M-H

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.91

1.10

3.82

1.10

3.44

0.98

*

H-L, M

27. Increase the total number of acres in the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.52

1.45

3.61

1.54

3.45

1.28

3.00

1.12

*

H-L, M

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

3.96

1.18

4.04

1.12

4.13

0.90

27. Increase the total number of acres in the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.95

1.47

3.57

1.78

4.06

1.26

3.69

1.22

***

L-M


40 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table 32. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.d.: Increase accessibility to a

diversity of people and members of underserved and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values,

products, and services. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and

the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.85

1.54

3.71

1.35

3.73

1.16

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.60

1.39

3.67

1.39

3.58

1.39

3.31

1.24

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

3.40

1.69

2.81

1.44

2.57

1.26

***

L-M.Hb

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

4.26

1.23

4.28

1.31

4.27

1.12

4.33

1.05

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.93

1.22

4.00

1.30

3.87

1.14

4.18

0.99

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.89

1.52

3.74

1.31

3.50

1.10

*

L-H

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.29

1.39

3.46

1.43

3.38

1.31

3.12

1.09

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.90

1.59

2.70

1.81

2.77

1.43

2.45

1.40

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

4.21

1.19

4.04

1.48

4.28

1.11

4.05

1.00

*

L-M

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.88

1.34

3.73

1.63

3.93

1.22

3.57

1.21 *

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.59

1.25

3.46

1.30

3.32

0.98

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.45

1.30

3.21

1.53

3.54

1.16

2.90

1.09

***

M-L, H

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

3.05

1.43

3.08

1.75

3.10

1.34

2.60

0.97

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

3.51

1.26

3.71

1.30

3.53

1.17

3.46

1.12

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.49

1.32

3.87

1.54

3.45

1.25

3.30

1.19

**

L-M, H

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 41

Strategic Plan Objective 2.e: Improve delivery of services to urban communities.

The final objective supporting the goal of providing benefits to people is the improvement of delivery of services to urban communities. Table 33 shows the results for this objective by level of familiarity.

Expanded off-highway motorized access and the development of new paved roads and

the expansion of commercial recreation are most supported by less familiar respondents.

Those with moderate familiarity are most in favor of trails for non-motorized recreation.

With this objective, we see again that those with lower agency familiarity see the preservation of a wilderness experience as a less important objective for public land management.

It is interesting that respondents most familiar with the agency do not see the delivery of

services for metropolitan populations as an appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service.

Where statistically significant differences exist, those with low or moderate agency familiarity see these items as more appropriate roles for the USDA Forest Service. Only slight

differences in attitudes about agency performance exist, and those less familiar generally

give higher ratings.

Table 33. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 2.e.: Improve delivery of services to

urban communities. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.41

1.49a

2.41

1.86

2.45

1.40

2.04

1.13

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

2.98

1.51

2.83

1.39

2.99

1.49

3. Trails for non-motorized recreation 3.75

1.33

3.49

1.36

3.82

1.24

3.50

1.13

**

L-Mb

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.59

1.43

3.68

1.58

3.61

1.37

3.34

1.16

5. Develop new paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.91

1.75

2.57

1.39

2.17

1.14

***

L-M, H

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.15

1.28

3.99

1.42

4.16

1.18

3.96

1.09

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.32

1.76

2.85

1.25

2.76

1.12

***

L-M, H

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.52

1.50

2.52

1.60

2.60

1.43

2.01

1.07

**

H-L, M

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.98

1.51

3.20

1.62

2.92

1.45

2.65

1.13

*

L-H

3. Trails for non-motorized recreation 3.71

1.37

3.77

1.60

3.67

1.34

3.47

1.13

continued on next page
42 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance: Develop and use the best scientific

information available to deliver technical and community assistance and to support

ecological, economic, and social sustainability.

The USDA Forest Service will develop and use the best scientific information available

to deliver technical and community assistance and to support ecological, economic, and

social sustainability.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.a: Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental,

and social change related to natural resources.

The first objective supporting scientific and technical assistance deals with increasing the

capacity of rural communities, tribal governments, and private landowners to deal with changing USDA Forest Service management. Table 34 shows the results for this objective by

familiarity with the USDA Forest Service.

Less familiar members of the public find the provision of information on recreation concerns to be less important than do those more familiar with the agency. Those with moderate

familiarity are most supportive of encouraging collaboration among groups. This group also

feels that the encouragement of collaboration is a less important role for the agency.

Table 33. Continued.

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.94

1.25

3.88

1.50

4.00

1.10

3.57

1.10

*

M-H

5. Develop new paved roads 2.70

1.57

2.89

1.83

2.57

1.42

1.92

0.97

***

L-M, H; MH

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.22

1.14

4.06

1.29

4.32

1.05

4.12

1.08

**

L-M

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.25

1.53

3.13

1.59

3.24

1.44

2.78

1.26

*

M-H

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized

access

2.97

1.45

3.16

1.63

2.90

1.38

3.10

1.16

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 3.25

1.38

3.39

1.48

3.35

1.28

2.98

1.01 *

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.59

1.27

3.47

1.42

3.73

1.19

3.24

0.88

*

M-H

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.61

1.33

3.44

1.48

3.71

1.11

3.39

1.06

*

L-M

5. Develop new paved roads 3.19

1.43

3.33

1.71

3.18

1.32

3.01

1.10

10. Preserve wilderness experience 3.88

1.10

3.80

1.25

3.93

1.06

3.72

0.85

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.45

1.24

3.47

1.37

3.54

1.21

3.36

0.99 a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 43

Table 34. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.a.: Better assist in building the

capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic,

environmental, and social change related to natural resources. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.85

1.54

3.71

1.35

3.73

1.16

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-Mb

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.30

1.13

4.48

0.90

4.44

0.81

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.02

1.30

4.18

1.34

4.03

1.20

3.95

1.13

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.20

3.97

1.46

4.27

1.05

3.81

1.10

***

M-L, H;

L-H

24. Use public advisory committees to advise

on management issues

3.90

1.20

3.94

1.18

3.86

1.17

3.77

1.09

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.93

1.22

4.00

1.30

3.87

1.14

4.18

0.99

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.89

1.52

3.74

1.31

3.50

1.10

*

L-H

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.46

1.07

4.46

0.94

4.13

1.00

*

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.08

1.17

3.91

1.37

4.12

1.12

3.76

1.06

*

M-H

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.17

3.84

1.48

4.20

1.03

4.42

0.76

***

L-M, H

24. Use public advisory committees to advise

on management issues

3.84

1.25

3.75

1.41

3.83

1.19

3.84

1.14

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.88

1.34

3.73

1.63

3.93

1.22

3.57

1.21 *

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.59

1.25

3.46

1.30

3.32

0.98

continued on next page
44 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Less familiar respondents see the provision of information on potential environmental

impacts as a more important objective for public lands, and they also rate the agency performance in this area higher than those more familiar. Other items with statistically different

attitudes on agency performance are again rated higher by less familiar respondents.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.b: Increase the effectiveness of scientific, developmental,

and technical information delivered to domestic and international interests.

The second Strategic Plan objective supporting the provision of scientific and technical

assistance deals with increasing the effectiveness of such assistance. The VOBA items dealing with this objective, presented by level of agency familiarity, are in table 35.

Support for informing the public about recreation concerns increases as familiarity with

the USDA Forest Service increases. As respondents are more familiar with the agency, however, they are less likely to feel that it is an appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service to

Table 35. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.b.: Increase the effectiveness of

scientific, developmental, and technical information delivered to domestic and international interests. Survey

items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-Mb

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.30

1.13

4.48

0.90

4.44

0.81

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.02

1.30

4.18

1.34

4.03

1.20

3.95

1.13

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.20

3.97

1.46

4.27

1.05

3.81

1.10

***

M-L, H

continued on next page

Table 34. Continued.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.66

1.45

3.49

1.23

3.02

1.08

**

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

3.40

1.38

3.51

1.38

3.43

1.32

2.63

1.08

***

H-L, M

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

3.72

1.22

3.75

1.25

3.75

1.15

3.52

1.07

24. Use public advisory committees to advise

on management issues

3.36

1.26

3.68

1.14

3.38

1.19

3.06

0.91

*

L-H

26. Make management decisions at the local

level (rather than national)

3.49

1.32

3.87

1.54

3.45

1.25

3.30

1.19

**

L-M, H

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 45

provide information about the potential environmental impacts of activities. Those with a

moderate level of familiarity are most supportive of the agency’s role in informing the public about economic benefits from natural resources. Respondents with a high degree of familiarity see encouraging collaboration as a more important role for the agency. Low familiarity corresponds with higher agency performance ratings where statistical differences occur.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.c: Improve the knowledge base provided through research,

inventory, and monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including

human uses, and to support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation’s

forests and grasslands.

The provision of scientific and technical assistance includes research efforts to improve

the understanding of ecosystems, as described in the third Strategic Plan objective under this

goal. VOBA items for this objective by familiarity are in table 36.

Support for informing the public about recreation concerns increases as familiarity with

the USDA Forest Service increases. As respondents are more familiar with the agency,

however, they are less likely to feel that it is an appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service

Table 35. Continued. 

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.46

1.07

4.46

0.94

4.13

1.00

*

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.08

1.17

3.91

1.37

4.12

1.12

3.76

1.06

*

M-H

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.17

3.84

1.48

4.20

1.03

4.42

0.76

***

L-M, H

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

21. Inform the public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.66

1.45

3.49

1.23

3.02

1.08

**

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

3.40

1.38

3.51

1.38

3.43

1.32

2.63

1.08

***

H-L, M

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

3.72

1.22

3.75

1.25

3.75

1.15

3.52

1.07

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
46 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table 36. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.c.: Improve the knowledge base

provided through research, inventory, and monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems,

including human uses, and to support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation's forests

and grasslands. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-Mb

21. Inform the public on potential environmental impacts of uses 4.39

1.02

4.30

1.13

4.48

0.90

4.44

0.81

22. Inform the public on economic value from developing

natural resources

4.02

1.30

4.18

1.34

4.03

1.20

3.95

1.13

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

3.97

1.46

4.27

1.05

3.81

1.10

***

M-L,

H

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

21. Inform the public on potential environmental impacts of uses 4.48

1.00

4.46

1.07

4.46

0.94

4.13

1.00

*

H-L,

M

22. Inform the public on economic value from developing

natural resources

4.08

1.17

3.91

1.37

4.12

1.12

3.76

1.06

*

M-H

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share

information

4.15

1.17

3.84

1.48

4.20

1.03

4.42

0.76

***

L-M,

H

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source

of diff.

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

21. Inform the public on potential environmental impacts of uses 3.50

1.33

3.66

1.45

3.49

1.23

3.02

1.08

**

H-L,

M

22. Inform the public on economic value from developing

natural resources

3.40

1.38

3.51

1.38

3.43

1.32

2.63

1.08

***

H-L,

M

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.75

1.25

3.75

1.15

3.52

1.07

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 47

to provide information about the potential environmental impacts of activities. Those with a

moderate level of familiarity are most supportive of the agency’s role in informing the public about economic benefits from natural resources. Respondents with a high degree of

familiarity see encouraging collaboration as a more important role for the agency. Low

familiarity corresponds with higher agency performance ratings where statistical differences

occur.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.d: Broaden the participation of less traditional research groups

in research and technical assistance programs.

The final objective under the goal of providing scientific and technical assistance is to

broaden participation in research and technical assistance programs. Table 37 shows the

VOBA results by familiarity for this Strategic Plan objective.

As an objective for public lands, the encouragement of collaboration is least supported by

those with the highest level of agency familiarity, but this same group sees this activity as a

more important role for the agency than those less familiar.

Table 37. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 3.d.: Broaden the participation of less

traditional research groups in research and technical assistance programs. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

23. Encourage collaboration between groups

to share information

4.15

1.20a

3.97

1.46

4.27

1.05

3.81

1.10

***

M-L, Hb

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

23. Encourage collaboration between groups

to share information

4.15

1.17

3.84

1.48

4.20

1.03

4.42

0.76

***

L-M, H

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

23. Encourage collaboration between groups

to share information

3.72

1.22

3.75

1.25

3.75

1.15

3.52

1.07

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
48 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Goal 4: Effective Public Service: Ensure the acquisition and use of an appropriate

corporate infrastructure to enable the efficient delivery of a variety of uses.

The USDA Forest Service will ensure the acquisition and use of an appropriate corporate

structure to enable the efficient delivery of a variety of uses. To meet the goal of effective

public service the USDA Forest Service has described six objectives. Three of these can be

addressed using the VOBA results.

Strategic Plan Objective 4.a: Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability.

The first objective is to improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability.

See table 38 for VOBA results by agency familiarity.

While no group feels that subsidizing commodity development is appropriate, those

who are most familiar with the USDA Forest Service are least in favor of such subsidies.

Strategic Plan Objective 4.b: Improve the safety and economy of USDA Forest Service

roads, trails, facilities, and operations and provide greater security for the public and

employees.

A second objective supporting the improvement of public service is to increase the safety

and economy of USDA Forest Service facilities. Table 39 shows the VOBA results by agency

familiarity.

Less familiar respondents are less in favor of informing the public about recreation

concerns on public lands, but are more in favor of increased law enforcement. This

group also sees increasing law enforcement as a more appropriate role for the USDA

Forest Service. As has been the case for most of the attitudes items, where statistically

significant differences exist, those with lower levels of agency familiarity give the agency

a higher rating.

Table 38. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.a.: Improve financial management to

achieve fiscal accountability. Survey item is from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment.

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1= strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

24. The federal government should subsidize

development and leasing of public lands

2.32

1.58a

2.46

1.88

2.19

1.42

1.77

1.09

***

L-M, H;

M-Hb

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 49

Strategic Plan Objective 4.f: Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands

and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs.

Providing access is the final objective under the goal of improving public service. VOBA

results for this objective are in table 40.

Higher support for easing the permitting process and for expanding commercial recreation exists among those with less familiarity with the USDA Forest Service. These respondents also see the expansion of commercial recreation as a more important role for the agency.

Table 39. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.b.: Improve the safety an economy

of USDA Forest Service roads, trails, facilities, and operations an provide greater security for the public and

employees. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

VOBA Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13a

4.09

1.47

4.19

1.02

4.20

0.88

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-Mb

29. Increase law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.21

4.16

1.18

3.88

1.22

3.77

0.89

*

L-M

VOBA Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.24

1.15

4.28

0.99

4.14

0.85

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

29. Increase law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.26

4.12

1.30

4.02

1.17

3.47

1.29

**

H-L, M

VOBA Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

3.79

1.21

4.09

1.14

3.82

1.09

3.57

1.02

**

L-M, H

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

29. Increase law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

3.85

1.27

4.10

1.31

3.91

1.18

3.48

1.08

**

H-L, M

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
50 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table 40. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for Strategic Plan Objective 4.f.: Provide appropriate access to

National Forest System lands and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service

programs. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.85

1.54

3.71

1.35

3.73

1.16

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.60

1.39

3.67

1.39

3.58

1.39

3.31

1.24

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

3.40

1.69

2.81

1.44

2.57

1.26

***

L-M, Hb

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.32

1.76

2.85

1.25

2.76

1.12

***

L-M, H

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

3.94

1.42

4.15

1.05

3.91

0.91 *

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.89

1.52

3.74

1.31

3.50

1.10

*

L-H

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.29

1.39

3.46

1.43

3.38

1.31

3.12

1.09

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.90

1.59

2.70

1.81

2.77

1.43

2.45

1.40

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.25

1.53

3.13

1.59

3.24

1.44

2.78

1.26

*

M-H

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

3.96

1.18

4.04

1.12

4.13

0.90

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.59

1.25

3.46

1.30

3.32

0.98

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.45

1.30

3.21

1.53

3.54

1.16

2.90

1.09

***

M-L, H

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

3.05

1.43

3.08

1.75

3.10

1.34

2.60

0.97

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.45

1.24

3.47

1.37

3.54

1.21

3.36

0.99

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.91

1.10

3.82

1.10

3.44

0.98

*

H-L, M

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

,

** , *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 51

Those with a moderate level of agency familiarity are most in favor of allowing diverse uses

of public lands.

The preservation of local cultural uses is most supported as an agency role by the less

familiar respondents. These respondents also give the agency higher performance ratings.

2. Survey Results for the Public Lands Values by Agency Familiarity

While no clear pattern emerges for the Socially Responsible Individual Values with respect to agency familiarity, one sees that those more familiar with the USDA Forest Service

are more likely to disagree with the eight values statements that comprise the Socially Responsible Management Values. The items in this factor are worded such that a lower number

(a response in “disagree” end of the scale) indicates a more “environmentally” oriented

perspective. See table 41.

Table 41. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for public lands values. Survey items are from the VOBA module

of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Group A. Socially Responsible Individual Values a

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

1. People should be more concerned about how

our public lands are used

4.73

0.74b

4.80

0.79

4.72

0.75

4.64

0.59

2. Natural resources must be preserved even if

people must do without some products

4.12

1.20

4.25

1.22

4.12

1.20

3.82

1.17

*

L-Hc

3. Consumers should be interest in the

environmental consequences of the products

they purchase

4.46

0.96

4.33

1.30

4.52

0.87

4.35

0.75

*

L-M

4. I would be willing to sign a petition for an

environmental cause

4.00

1.34

4.13

1.40

3.95

1.35

3.96

1.17

5r.d

The whole pollution issue has upset me, I feel

it’s not overrated

3.70

1.45

3.34

1.73

3.82

1.38

3.83

1.31

***

L-M,

L-H

6. I have often thought that if we could just get by

with a little less there would be more left for

future generations

4.00

1.35

3.97

1.64

4.04

1.28

3.82

1.32

7. Manufacturers should be encourage to use

recycled materials in their operations

4.65

0.84

4.58

1.06

4.66

0.79

4.69

0.69

8. Future generations should be as important as the

current one in decisions about public lands

4.54

0.96

4.57

1.05

4.52

0.96

4.57

0.78

9. I would be willing to pay five dollars more each

time I use public lands for recreation

3.50

1.57

3.53

1.87

3.51

1.53

3.38

1.31

10. People should urge their friends to limit their

use of products made from scarce resources

4.16

1.14

4.12

1.23

4.22

1.10

3.86

1.19

*

M-H

11. I am glad there are national forests even if I

never get to see them

4.72

0.80

4.63

0.97

4.74

0.75

4.71

0.78

12. People can think public lands are valuable even

if they do not actually go there themselves

4.59

0.88

4.52

1.16

4.66

0.76

4.32

0.93

**

M-H

13. I am willing to stop buying products from

companies that pollute

3.89

1.32

3.74

1.64

3.95

1.23

3.90

1.25

continued on next page
52 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

3. Survey Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes Grouped by Strategic Level

Objectives, by Familiarity With the USDA Forest Service

Access

Respondents with low or moderate agency familiarity offer stronger support for the expansion of off-highway motorized access, trails for non-motorized recreation, and the development of more paved roads. These respondents also see the agency as having a stronger

role in the expansion of off-highway motorized access, in providing trails for motorized

vehicles, in designating trails for specific uses, and in development of paved roads.

Those most familiar with the agency rate the performance in the area of expanding offhighway motorized access higher than other groups, while those with low or moderate familiarity are more likely to approve of USDA Forest Service performance in other areas

related to access. See table 42.

Table 41. Continued.

Group B. Socially Responsible Management Values

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

18. We should actively harvest more trees for a

much larger human population

2.83

1.66

3.30

1.97

2.73

1.59

2.28

1.22

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

19. The most important role for public lands is

providing jobs and income for local people

3.16

1.46

3.63

1.68

3.08

1.39

2.31

1.04

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

20. The decision to develop resources should be

made mostly on economic grounds

2.94

1.46

3.23

1.53

2.95

1.47

2.04

0.99

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

21. The main reason for maintaining resources

today is so we can develop them in the future

4.01

1.34

4.34

1.30

3.98

1.31

3.42

1.37

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

22. I think the public land managers are doing an

adequate job of protecting

3.20

1.27

3.27

1.47

3.23

1.23

2.79

1.07

**

L-H, M-H

23. The primary use of forests should be for

products that are useful to humans

2.92

1.59

3.34

1.80

2.87

1.57

2.28

1.14

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

24. The federal government should subsidize the

development and leasing of public lands

2.22

1.48

2.46

1.88

2.19

1.42

1.77

1.09

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

25. The government has better places to spend

money than a strong conservation program

2.30

1.34

2.51

1.51

2.27

1.32

1.90

1.02

***

L-M, L-H,

M-H

Group mean 2.95 3.26 2.91 2.35 a

 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree

b

 Standard deviation

c

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity 

d

 Values statement 5 has been reverse scored in order to calculate a group mean. See Appendix A for an explanation of reverse scoring

14. I am willing to make personal sacrifices for the

sake of slowing down pollution

4.31

1.09

4.17

1.32

4.38

1.04

4.26

0.93

*

L-M

15. Forests have right to exist for their own sake 4.13

1.23

4.15

1.36

4.15

1.20

3.95

1.25

16. Wildlife, plants and humans have equal rights to

live and grow

4.27

1.24

4.55

1.16

4.20

1.25

4.05

1.24

**

L-M,

L-H

17. Donating time or money to worthy causes is

important to me

4.22

1.03

4.25

1.10

4.21

1.03

4.16

0.94

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 53

Table 42. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for access. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

 Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.41

1.49a

2.41

1.86

2.45

1.40

2.04

1.13

2. Increase trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

2.98

1.51

2.83

1.39

2.99

1.49

3. Increase trails for non-motorized recreation 3.75

1.33

3.49

1.36

3.82

1.24

3.50

1.13

**

L-Mb

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.59

1.43

3.68

1.58

3.61

1.37

3.34

1.16

5. Develop more paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.91

1.75

2.57

1.39

2.17

1.14

***

L-M, H

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.84

1.41

3.65

1.67

3.83

1.30

3.99

1.14

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 2.52

1.50

2.52

1.60

2.60

1.43

2.01

1.07

**

H-L, M

2. Increase trails for motorized vehicles 2.98

1.51

3.20

1.62

2.92

1.45

2.65

1.13

*

L-H

3. Increase trails for non-motorized recreation 3.71

1.37

3.77

1.60

3.67

1.34

3.47

1.13

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.94

1.25

3.88

1.50

4.00

1.10

3.57

1.10

*

M-H

5. Develop more paved roads 2.70

1.57

2.89

1.83

2.57

1.42

1.92

0.97

***

L-M, H; M-H

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

development & motorized access

3.66

1.46

3.57

1.50

3.71

1.39

3.61

1.39

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of diff.

1. Expand off-highway motorized access 3.25

1.38

3.39

1.48

3.35

1.28

2.98

1.01 *

2. Increase trails for motorized vehicles 3.25

1.38

3.35

1.79

3.31

1.31

2.99

1.03

3. Increase trails for non-motorized recreation 3.59

1.27

3.47

1.42

3.73

1.19

3.24

0.88

*

M-H

4. Designate trails for specific uses 3.61

1.33

3.44

1.48

3.71

1.11

3.39

1.06

*

L-M

5. Develop more paved roads 3.19

1.43

3.33

1.71

3.18

1.32

3.01

1.10

6. Designate more wilderness to stop

d l & id

3.45

1.34

3.48

1.35

3.30

1.30

3.16

1.21

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
54 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Preservation/Conservation

The next set of items are related to the strategic level objective of preserving or conserving natural resources. Categorizations by agency familiarity are in table 43 for this objective.

Highly familiar members of the public are less likely to support policies that eliminate

timber harvest and mining in order to preserve natural resources. These same respondents

are also less likely to see the protection of ecosystems and watershed and the preservation of

a wilderness experience as appropriate roles for the USDA Forest Service.

People more familiar with the agency also see the performance of the USDA Forest Service in the areas of watershed and ecosystem and habitat protection as less favorable than

those less familiar.

Table 43. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for preservation/conservation. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.73

0.76a

4.70

0.87

4.72

0.71

4.74

0.68

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

4.18

1.46

4.31

1.07

3.99

1.14

*

M-Hb

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.58

0.92

4.48

1.19

4.59

0.84

4.55

0.88

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.15

1.28

3.99

1.42

4.16

1.18

3.96

1.09

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.82

1.38

3.85

1.54

3.71

1.35

3.73

1.16

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.61

0.83

4.60

0.88

4.62

0.79

4.61

0.64

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.23

1.31

4.22

1.09

3.98

1.22

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 4.53

0.98

4.40

1.26

4.55

0.91

4.23

1.24

*

M-H

10. Preserve wilderness experience 4.22

1.14

4.06

1.29

4.32

1.05

4.12

1.08

**

L-M

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.89

1.52

3.74

1.31

3.50

1.10

*

L-H

continued on next page

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 3.91

1.17

3.97

1.37

3.95

1.06

3.67

1.03
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 55

Economic Development

Survey items dealing with economic development appear in table 44.

Respondents with high or moderate agency familiarity are more in favor of restricting the development of minerals, while those with lower familiarity are more in favor of

easing the permitting process. This group also feels that this is a more important role for

the USDA Forest Service than do those with a higher level of agency familiarity.

More familiar respondents feel that the expansion of commercial recreation is a slightly

unimportant role for the agency, while those less familiar see this as slightly important.

Agency performance is rated higher (where there are differences) by those who are less

familiar.

Table 44. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for economic development. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

VOBA Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.60

1.39a

3.67

1.39

3.58

1.39

3.31

1.24

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.96

1.42

3.51

1.87

4.14

1.19

3.97

1.08

***

L-M, Hb

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.99

1.27

4.00

1.41

4.05

1.18

3.76

1.22

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

3.40

1.69

2.81

1.44

2.57

1.26

***

L-M, H

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

4.26

1.23

4.28

1.31

4.27

1.12

4.33

1.05

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.32

1.76

2.85

1.25

2.76

1.12

***

L-M, H

continued on next page

Table 43. Continued. 

8. Preserve natural resources through policies

such as no timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.81

1.33

3.74

1.21

3.56

1.13

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitat 3.90

1.16

4.13

1.30

4.02

1.01

3.52

1.14

***

H-L, M

10. Preserve wilderness experience 3.88

1.10

3.80

1.25

3.93

1.06

3.72

0.85

11. Preserve local cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.59

1.25

3.46

1.30

3.32

0.98 a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
56 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Education

Items 18 through 23 deal with education or the dispersal of information to the public.

Breakdowns by familiarity for these items are in table 45.

More familiar respondents are more in favor of informing the public about recreation

concerns and about potential environmental impacts than are respondents with low familiarity. Those with moderate familiarity are the most supportive of encouraging collaboration.

However, those with high familiarity see this as a more important agency role than do those

with low or moderate levels of familiarity.

Respondents with low or moderate familiarity see the role of informing the public on

environmental impacts and on economic values as more important than do those who have a

high degree of agency familiarity.

Again, agency performance receives the highest ratings from those with less familiarity

with the USDA Forest Service.

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.45

1.24

3.47

1.37

3.54

1.21

3.36

0.99 a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

Table 44. Continued. 

VOBA Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.29

1.39

3.46

1.43

3.38

1.31

3.12

1.09

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.95

1.43

3.57

1.81

4.01

1.34

3.96

1.22

**

L-M

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.94

1.34

3.90

1.41

4.08

1.21

3.77

1.26

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

2.90

1.59

2.70

1.81

2.77

1.43

2.45

1.40

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

4.21

1.19

4.04

1.48

4.28

1.11

4.05

1.00

*

L-M

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.25

1.53

3.13

1.59

3.24

1.44

2.78

1.26

*

M-H

VOBA Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif. diff.

Source of

diff.

12. Provide natural resources to dependent

communities

3.45

1.30

3.21

1.53

3.54

1.16

2.90

1.09

***

M-L, H

13. Restrict development of minerals 3.30

1.50

3.25

1.58

3.33

1.49

3.08

1.28

14. Restrict timber harvest and grazing 3.50

1.36

3.63

1.50

3.42

1.28

3.09

1.15

*

L-H

15. Make the permitting process easier for

established uses

3.05

1.43

3.08

1.75

3.10

1.34

2.60

0.97

16. Develop a national policy for natural

resource development

3.51

1.26

3.71

1.30

3.53

1.17

3.46

1.12


USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 57

Table 45. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for education. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86a 4.41

1.13

4.62

0.80

4.50

0.85

*

L-Mb

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.09

1.47

4.19

1.02

4.20

0.88

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.37

1.18

4.57

0.84

4.63

0.63

*

L-M

21. Inform the public on potential environmental

impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.30

1.13

4.48

0.90

4.44

0.81

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.02

1.30

4.18

1.34

4.03

1.20

3.95

1.13

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.20

3.97

1.46

4.27

1.05

3.81

1.10

***

M-L, H

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.41

1.30

4.54

0.85

4.52

0.83

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.24

1.15

4.28

0.99

4.14

0.85

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.57

0.91

4.53

0.91

4.47

0.61

21. Inform the public on potential environmental

impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.46

1.07

4.46

0.94

4.13

1.00

*

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

4.08

1.17

3.91

1.37

4.12

1.12

3.76

1.06

*

M-H

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

4.15

1.17

3.84

1.48

4.20

1.03

4.42

0.76

***

L-M, H

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

18. Develop volunteer programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

4.16

1.41

3.82

1.17

3.30

1.13

***

L-M, H;

M-H

19. Develop volunteer programs to improve

facilities (trails etc.)

3.79

1.21

4.09

1.14

3.82

1.09

3.57

1.02

**

L-M, H

20. Inform the public about recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

3.95

1.48

3.89

1.21

3.83

1.05

continued on next page
58 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Natural Resource Management

Natural resource management issues are captured in the final set of items presented in

table 46.

People who are more familiar with the USDA Forest Service are more in favor of making

management decisions at the local level. At the same time they are less supportive of collecting an entrance fee for National Forests and Grasslands and for increased law enforcement

on National Forest System lands. This group also sees the role of increasing law enforcement as less important for the agency than the less familiar groups.

Respondents with low agency familiarity see increasing the total acreage of the National

Forest System as a less important role for the agency than do moderately or highly familiar

individuals. Higher levels of agency familiarity again correspond to lower ratings of agency

performance.

Table 46. Mean scores by respondent familiarity for natural resource management. Survey items are from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on

management issues

3.90

1.20a 3.94

1.18

3.86

1.17

3.77

1.09

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

3.94

1.42

4.15

1.05

3.91

0.91 *

26. Make management decisions at the local level

(rather than national)

3.93

1.22

4.00

1.30

3.87

1.14

4.18

0.99

27. Increase total number of acres in the National

Forest and Grassland system

3.81

1.42

4.02

1.36

3.66

1.38

3.59

1.23

*

L-Mb

28. Collect an entry fee to support National Forests

and Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.43

1.76

3.81

1.21

2.94

1.23

***

M-L, H

29. Increasing law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.21

4.16

1.18

3.88

1.22

3.77

0.89

*

L-M

30. Trade public lands for private to eliminate

inholdings, acquire unique lands

3.05

1.48

2.97

1.66

2.98

1.50

3.15

1.13

continued on next page

Table 45. Continued.

21. Inform the public on potential environmental

impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.66

1.45

3.49

1.23

3.02

1.08

**

H-L, M

22. Inform the public on economic value from

developing natural resources

3.40

1.38

3.51

1.38

3.43

1.32

2.63

1.08

***

H-L, M

23. Encourage collaboration between groups to

share information

3.72

1.22

3.75

1.25

3.75

1.15

3.52

1.07

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 59

Table 46. Continued.

 Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on

management issues

3.36

1.26

3.68

1.14

3.38

1.19

3.06

0.91

*

L-H

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.91

1.10

3.82

1.10

3.44

0.98

*

H-L, M

26. Make management decisions at the local level

(rather than national)

3.49

1.32

3.87

1.54

3.45

1.25

3.30

1.19

**

L-M, H

27. Increase total number of acres in the National

Forest and Grassland system

3.52

1.45

3.61

1.54

3.45

1.28

3.00

1.12

*

H-L, M

28. Collect an entry fee to support National Forests

and Grasslands

3.61

1.36

3.85

1.41

3.52

1.30

3.24

0.88

*

L-M, H

29. Increasing law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

3.85

1.27

4.10

1.31

3.91

1.18

3.48

1.08

**

H-L, M

30. Trade public lands for private to eliminate

inholdings, acquire unique lands

3.22

1.27

3.15

1.59

3.29

1.25

3.19

1.13

a

 Standard deviation

b

 For example, L-M indicates that the source of the statistically significant difference lies in the differences between the responses of those with

low agency familiarity and those with moderate familiarity

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

N=5,064

Low

familiarity

N=942

Moderate

familiarity

N=3,533

High

familiarity

N=589

Signif.

diff.

Source of

diff.

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on

management issues

3.84

1.25

3.75

1.41

3.83

1.19

3.84

1.14

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

3.96

1.18

4.04

1.12

4.13

0.90

26. Make management decisions at the local level

(rather than national)

3.88

1.34

3.73

1.63

3.93

1.22

3.57

1.21 *

27. Increase total number of acres in the National

Forest and Grassland system

3.95

1.47

3.57

1.78

4.06

1.26

3.69

1.22

***

L-M

28. Collect an entry fee to support National Forests

and Grasslands

3.69

1.43

3.84

1.54

3.74

1.26

3.31

1.19

*

H-L, M

29. Increasing law enforcement on National

Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.26

4.12

1.30

4.02

1.17

3.47

1.29

**

H-L, M

30. Trade public lands for private to eliminate

inholdings, acquire unique lands

3.22

1.49

3.38

1.76

3.16

1.44

3.44

1.18


60 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Selected References

Antil, J. H. 1984. Socially responsible consumers: profile and implications for public policy. Journal

of Macromarketing. (Fall): 18–39.

Antil, J. H.; Bennett, P. D. 1979. Construction and validation of a scale to measure socially responsible consumer behavior. In: Henion, K. E., II; Kinnear, T. C., eds. The conserver society. American Marketing Association: 51–68.

Austin, J. T.; Vancouver, J. B. 1996. Goal constructs in psychology: structure, process, and content.

Psychological Bulletin. 120(3): 338–75.

Barron, F. H.; Barrett, B. E. 1996. Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Management

Science. 42(11): 1515–1523.

Bearden, W. O.; Netemeyer, R. G.; Mobley, M. F. 1993. Handbook of marketing scales: multi-item

measures for marketing and consumer behavior research. London: Sage Publications.

Beatty, S. E.; Kahle, L. R.; Homer, P.; Misra, S. 1985. Alternative measurement approaches to consumer values: the list of values and the Rokeach value survey. Psychology and Marketing. 2(3):

181–200.

Bengston, D. N. 1993. Changing forest values and ecosystem management. Society and Natural

Resources. 7: 515–33.

Braithwaite, V. A.; Scott, W. A. 1991. Values, in measures of personality and social psychological

attitudes. In: Robinson, J. P.; Shaver, P. R.; Wrightsman, L. S., eds. Measures of personality and

social psychological attitudes. San Diego CA: Academic Press: 661–748.

Clemen, R. T. 1996. Making hard decisions: an introduction to decision analysis. Second Edition.

Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press.

Churchill, G. A., Jr. 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research. 16(February): 64–73.

Crowne, D. P.; Marlowe, D. 1960. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology. 24(3): 349–354.

Csikszentmihalyi, M.; Rochberg-Halton, E. 1981. The meaning of things: domestic symbols and the

self. Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.

Deaton, A.; Muellbauer, J. 1980. Economics and consumer behavior. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge

University Press.

Duffield, J. W.; Brown, T. C.; Allen, S. D. 1994. Economic value of instream flow in Montana s Big

Hole and Bitterroot Rivers. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-317. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Dunlap, R. E.; Van Liere, S. D. 1978. The new environmental paradigm. Journal of Environmental

Education. 9(4): 10–19.

Dunlap, R. E.; Heffernan, R. B. 1975. Outdoor recreation and environmental concern: an empirical

examination. Rural Sociology. 40: 18–30.

Duvall, W.; Sessions, G. 1986. Deep ecology. Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Smith Books.

Eagley, A. H.; Chaiken, S. 1993. The psychology of attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

College Publishers.

Edwards, W. E. 1977. How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decisionmaking.

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 7: 326–340.

Fazio, R. 1986. How do attitudes guide behaviors? In: Sorrentino, R. M.; Higgins, E. T., eds. The

handbook of motivation and cognition: foundations of social behavior. New York: Guilford Press:

204–43.

Fishburn, P. C. 1967. Methods of estimating additive utilities. Management Science. 13: 435–453.

Freeman, A. M. 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods.

Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

Gorsuch, R. L. 1983. Factor analysis. Second Edition. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

Gottleib, A. 1989. The wise use agenda: a citizen’s policy guide to environmental resource issues.

Bellevue, WA: Free Enterprise Press.

Guttman, J. 1982. A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of

Marketing. 46(2): 60–72.

Gregory, R. L.; Keeney, R. L. 1994. Creating policy alternatives using stakeholder values. Management Science. 40: 1035.

Homer, P. M.; Kahle, L. R. 1988. A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior hierarchy.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 54(4): 638–46.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 61

Hyberg, B.T. 1987. Multiattribute decision theory and forest management: a discussion and application. Forest Science. 33: 835–845.

Jones, E. S.; Calloway, W. 1995. Neutral bystander, intrusive micromanager, or useful catalyst: the

role of Congress in effecting change within the Forest Service. Policy Studies Journal. 23: 4.

Kangas, J. 1994. An approach to public participation in strategic forest management planning. Forest

Ecology and Management. 70: 75–88.

Keeney, R. L. 1992. Value-focused thinking: a path to creative decisionmaking. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Keeney, R. L.; Raiffa, H. 1976. Decisions with multiple objectives. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

[Republished in 1993.]

Lichtenstein, E.; Brewer, W. F. 1983. Memory for goal-directed events. Cognitive Psychology. 12:

412–45.

Manzer, L. L.; Miller, S. J. 1982. An examination of value-attitude structure in the study of donor

behavior. Advances in Consumer Research. 10: 204–6.

Martin, I. M.; Bender, H. W.; Martin, W. A.; Shields, D. J. 1998. The impact of goals on the “values

à attitudes à behaviors” framework. In: Proceedings: Decision Science Institute; 1998 November;

Las Vegas, NV: 196–229.

Martin, W. E.; Bender, H. W.; Shields, D. J. 2000. Stakeholder objectives for public lands: rankings

of forest management alternatives. Journal of Environmental Management. 58(1): 21–32.

Martin, W. E.; Bender, H. W. 1999. Modeling public land use decisions as a cooperative game.

International Journal of Environment & Pollution. 12(2/3): 217–231.

McCracken, G. 1986. Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the structure and movement

of cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research. 13(June): 71–84.

Munson, J. M. 1984. Personal values: considerations on their measurement and application to five

areas of research inquiry. In: Pitts, R. E.; Woodside, A. G., eds. Personal values and consumer

psychology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books: 13–33.

Nunally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Petulla, J. M. 1980. American environmentalism: values, tactics, priorities. College Station: Texas A

& M University Press.

Pfanzagl, J. 1968. Theory of measurement. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Pykalainen, J.; Loikkanen, T. 1997. An application of numeric decision analysis on participatory

forest planning: the case of Kainuu. EFI Proceedings. 14:125–132.

Ray, P. H. 1997. The emerging culture. American Demographics. (Feb): 29–34.

Reynolds, T. J.; Guttman, J. 1988. Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. Special

Issue: Values in Journal of Advertising Research. 28(March): 11–31.

Richins, M. L. 1994. Valuing things: the public and private meanings of possessions. Journal of

Consumer Research. 21(Dec.): 504–21.

Richins, M. L.; Dawson, S. 1992. A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research. 21(Dec.): 504–21.

Rokeach, M. J. 1968. The role of values in public opinion research. Public Opinion Quarterly. 32(Winter): 547–49.

Rokeach, M. J. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.

Sagoff, M. 1988. The economy of the earth: philosophy, law and the environment. Cambridge, MA:

Cambridge University Press.

Sedjo, R. A. 1995. Ecosystem management: an uncharted path for public forests. Resources. 129(Fall).

Steel, B. S.; List, P.; Shindler, B. 1994. Conflicting values about federal forests: a comparison of

national and Oregon publics. Society and Natural Resources. 7: 137–53.

Torgerson, W. S. 1958. Theory and methods of scaling. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Von Winterfeldt, D.; Edwards, W. 1986. Decision analysis and behavior research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wilkinson, C. F.; Anderson, H. M. 1987. Land and resource planning in the National Forests. Washington, DC: Island Press.
62 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Appendix A. Methodology

Survey Design and Implementation

The individual values, objectives, beliefs, and attitudes statements in the survey are sets

of scale items that have been subjected to extensive pretesting and have been applied in

various other studies. The Public Lands Values (Values) scale was developed using approximately 200 items that, through a series of iterations using both student samples and adult

samples around the United States, was reduced to a 25-item scale. This scale was designed

to focus on values that people hold for the environment in general and public lands in particular. It has been tested on four National Forests in Colorado (Arapaho, Roosevelt, Pike,

and San Isabel) using various traditional and nontraditional stakeholder groups. For an indepth explanation of how the Values scale was constructed and validated see Martin, Martin,

Shields, and Wise (1999).

The Objectives, Beliefs, and Attitudes scale items were developed using a similar approach on a nationwide basis. First, a series of 80 focus groups were held with both traditional and nontraditional stakeholders around the continental United States. An objectives

hierarchy process was conducted with each focus group with the purpose of eliciting information on people’s goals for the management of forests and grasslands. The hierarchies

were validated with each respective group, then merged and duplicate objectives eliminated.

The fundamental objectives from the merged hierarchy were the source of almost all the

objectives statements in the survey instrument. In addition, objectives that related to a few

issues of importance to the USDA Forest Service, but not raised by any focus group, were

also included. The final Objectives scale (Objectives for Managing Public and Private Forest and Grasslands) contains 30 items and is very similar to the set of objectives that were

developed through focus groups on the Arapaho and Roosevelt, and the Pike and San Isabel,

National Forests. (For any questions concerning the methodology used to develop any of the

scale items please see Martin, et al. 1998; Martin, Bender, & Shields 2000).

For each objectives scale item there is a corresponding belief concerning the role of the

USDA Forest Service in achieving that objective and an attitude regarding the job that the

USDA Forest Service is doing in achieving that objective. The purpose of the Beliefs scale

items is to ascertain whether a respondent thinks it is an appropriate role of the USDA Forest

Service to manage so as to achieve a given objective on public lands. The purpose of the

Attitudes scale items is to determine how good a job the respondent thinks the USDA Forest

Service is doing in fulfilling the related objective, irrespective of the beliefs about whether

the agency should in fact be attempting to fulfill that objective. Thus the Beliefs and Attitudes scale items tier down from the Objectives scale items, which in turn are derived from

information provided by the focus groups. All scale items were measured using Likert scales

of 1 to 5. The objectives scale items were anchored by 1=not at all important and 5=very

important, and the values and beliefs, and scale items were anchored by 1=strongly disagree

and 5=strongly agree. The attitudes scale items were anchored by 1=very unfavorable ad

5=very favorable. For all the scale items, 8= don’t know and 9=refused.

This survey of the American public was administered for the USDA Forest Service via

telephone by the University of Tennessee. Due to restrictions imposed by the Office of Management and Budget, contact time was limited to an average of 15 minutes. The VOBA

portion of the survey was limited to 7 minutes on average, with the remainder of the time

used to ask respondents the familiarity, demographic, and selected recreation-oriented questions. Because the full VOBA survey could not be completed within the allotted time window, a split sampling design was utilized. Each respondent was asked a subset of the full set
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 63

of questions. Approximately 7,000 responses will be needed to ensure that the number of

responses to each individual scale item are adequate to support multivariate statistical analysis. The first 5,064 NSRE responses were collected in the fall of 1999; the remaining 2,000

responses were collected during the spring and summer of 2000.

Data Analysis

This report is based on 7,069 responses. The sample data do not reflect the demographic

makeup of the United States. Therefore the data were weighted so as to be consistent with

the demographics of the United States for 1999 as predicted by the US Census Bureau. An

overall weight was constructed for each individual response based on the following demographic factors: age, race, sex, education level, and metropolitan or non-metropolitan area.

Descriptive statistics were then calculated for each of the 115 items, including mean, standard deviation, and frequency distribution. In essence, those responses from under-sampled

areas or population groups were given greater than proportional weight during the calculation of the descriptive statistics for each VOBA item, while responses from over-sampled

groups or areas were given less than proportional weight.

Based on past research and testing, responses to the Public Lands Values scale load on

two latent variables, or factors, that have been labeled Socially Responsible Individual Values (SRIV) and Socially Responsible Management Values (SRMV). These factors were confirmed using a subset of NSRE responses where the individuals were asked the complete set

of values items. Factor scores (group means) have been calculated for the SRIV and SRMV

and, where appropriate, items have been reverse scored.

When the VOBA was designed, care was taken to avoid the appearance of an instrument

that was biased toward or against a specific position. To do this, the “direction” of the scale

varied. For example, for one item a “strongly agree” response might indicate a conservation/

preservation orientation, while for another item the same response might indicate a development orientation. While this is useful to increase the acceptance of the instrument and subsequent response rates, it creates problems when items with the opposite direction are grouped.

In order to calculate a group mean for two or more items that have the opposite direction,

it is necessary to make the items move in the same direction. To illustrate this we will use an

example. Suppose we want to examine the overall preference for sweets as indicated by the

preference for ice cream and pie. We have two scale items. For each, 1 indicates “strongly

disagree” and 5 indicates “strongly agree” as in the Public Lands Values scale. In order to

avoid the appearance of bias toward or against sweets, the two items move in opposite directions: “I like ice cream” and “I don’t like pie.” Clearly a person who likes all sweets will

answer 5 to the first item and 1 to the second. Conversely, someone who does not like sweets

will answer 1 to the first and 5 to the second. If these items are grouped, these two (clearly

different) respondents will have the same mean for the item group (3). This would give a

researcher little (if any) useful information. In order to calculate a useful mean, we choose

one of the items, in this example we’ll choose the second, and reverse the scoring. So, an

answer of 5 to “I don’t like pie” becomes a 1 (and we can reword the item as “I like pie”). An

answer of 4 becomes 2, 3 remains the same (neutral), 2 becomes 4 and 1 becomes 5. This in

effect creates a new item that corresponds in direction to “I like ice cream.” Respondent one

(the sweet tooth) will have a mean for the two items of 5 and then respondent one’s mean

becomes 1. Now we have an indication of each respondent’s preference for sweets. We can

also calculate the mean for the entire sample and gain information about the sample’s overall preference for sweets. A similar re-scoring was done for certain items in the VOBA in

order to more accurately characterize overall preferences for item groups.
64 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

The objectives, beliefs, attitudes, and values items are also grouped into sections consistent with the USDA Forest Service 2000 Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives. During the

development of the national survey, the focus groups were not asked to respond specifically

to Forest Service Strategic Plan Objectives, but rather to express their own objectives. To a

large degree, these two sets of objectives overlap. Where possible, objectives statements

expressed by the focus groups (and used as the national survey) have been linked to the

USDA Forest Service 2000 Strategic Plan Objectives in order to understand how well the

public supports these agency objectives.

In addition, based upon the results of the focus group interviews, an objectives hierarchy

was constructed for each group. These hierarchies indicated what each group or individual

was attempting to achieve and how they would achieve each goal or objective. These objectives ranged from the very abstract strategic level to the more focused or concrete means

level. The means level objectives are at the bottom of the hierarchy while the strategic objective is at the top. Fundamental objectives between the means level and the strategic level

completed the hierarchies.

Each of the objectives hierarchies was confirmed with its respective group so as to ensure

that it accurately reflected their goals and objectives. A combined objectives hierarchy was

then constructed that included all the objectives stated by each group or individual interviewed. The result was a hierarchy that covered 5 strategic level objectives related to access,

preservation/conservation, commodity development, education and natural resource management. These 5 strategic level objectives were supported by 30 higher-level fundamental

objectives. In order to facilitate analysis, the results for the 30 fundamental level objectives

(the survey items) have been grouped according to the strategic level objectives.

The 30 fundamental level objectives were used to develop 30 objectives statements that

were used in the NSRE survey. The 30 objectives statements were divided into 5 groups

based upon the strategic level objectives that the focus groups had identified. During the

telephone interviews each respondent was asked one statement from each of the 5 strategic

level groups in order to obtain a statistically valid sample for each statement and for each

strategic level group.

Responses to the demographic questions were used to break the full data set down, first

by region (East and West, divided at approximately the 100th meridian), then by metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties within each region. The weighed means for each item

broken down into the subsets described above, along with national means for each category,

are presented in Appendices F, G, and H.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 65

Appendix B. Values Statements for NSRE

Telephone Survey

1. People should be more concerned about how our public lands are used.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

2. Natural resources must be preserved even if people must do without some products.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

3. Consumers should be interested in the environmental consequences of the products they

purchase.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

4. I would be willing to sign a petition for an environmental cause.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

5. The whole pollution issue has never upset me too much since I feel it’s somewhat overrated.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

6. I have often thought that if we could just get by with a little less there would be more left

for future generations.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

7. Manufacturers should be encouraged to use recycled materials in their manufacturing and

processing operations.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

8. Future generations should be as important as the current one in the decisions about public

lands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

9. I would be willing to pay five dollars more each time I use public lands for recreational

purposes (for example, hiking, camping, hunting).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

10. People should urge their friends to limit their use of products made from scarce resources.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

11. I am glad there are national forests even if I never get to see them.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
66 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

12. People can think public lands are valuable even if they do not actually go there themselves.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

13. I am willing to stop buying products from companies that pollute the environment even

though it might be inconvenient.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

14. I am willing to make personal sacrifices for the sake of slowing down pollution.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

15. Forests have a right to exist for their own sake, regardless of human concerns and uses.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

16. Wildlife, plants and humans have equal rights to live and grow.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

17. Donating time or money to worthy causes is important to me.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

18. We should actively harvest more trees to meet the needs of a much larger human population.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

19. The most important role for the public lands is providing jobs and income for local

people.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

20. The decision to develop resources should be based mostly on economic grounds.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

21. The main reason for maintaining resources today is so we can develop them in the future

if we need to.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

22. I think that the public land managers are doing an adequate job of protecting natural

resources from being over used.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

23. The primary use of forests should be for products that are useful to humans.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 67

24. The Federal government should subsidize the development and leasing of public lands to

companies.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

25. The government has better places to spend money than devoting resources to a strong

conservation program.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
68 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Appendix C. Objectives Statements for the

NSRE Phone Survey

1. Expanding access for motorized off-highway vehicles on forests and grasslands (for example, snowmobiling or 4-wheel driving).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

2. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for motorized vehicles such as snowmobiles or ATVs.

Not at all Very

 important 1 2 3 4 5 important

3. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for non-motorized recreation such as hiking or cross-country skiing.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

4. Designating some existing recreation trails for specific use (for example, creating separate trails for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing, or for mountain biking and horseback riding).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

5. Developing new paved roads on forests and grasslands for access for cars and recreational

vehicles.

 Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

6. Designating more wilderness areas on public land that stops access for development and

motorized uses.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

7. Conserving and protecting forests and grasslands that are the source of our water resources, such as streams, lakes, and watershed areas.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

8. Preserving the natural resources of forests and grasslands through such policies as no

timber harvesting or no mining.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitats.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

10. Preserving the ability to have a “wilderness” experience on forests and grasslands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 69

11. Preserving the cultural uses of forests and grasslands by Native Americans and Native

Hispanics such as firewood gathering, herb/berry/plant gathering, and ceremonial access.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

12. Providing natural resources from forests and grasslands to support communities dependent on grazing, mining, or timber harvesting.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

13. Restricting mineral development on forests and grasslands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

14. Restricting timber harvesting and grazing on forests and grasslands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

15. Making the permitting process easier for some established uses of forests and grasslands

such as grazing, logging, mining, and commercial recreation.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

16. Developing a national policy that guides natural resource development of all kinds (for

example, specifies levels of extraction and regulates environmental impacts).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

17. Expanding commercial recreation on forests and grasslands (for example, ski areas,

guide services, or outfitters).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

18. Developing volunteer programs to improve forests and grasslands (for example, planting trees or improving water quality).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

19. Developing volunteer programs to maintain trails and facilities on forests and grasslands

(for example, trail maintenance or campground maintenance).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

20. Informing the public about recreation concerns on forests and grasslands such as safety,

trail etiquette, and respect for wildlife.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

21. Informing the public on the potential environmental impacts of all uses associated with

forests and grasslands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

22. Informing the public on the economic value received by developing our natural resources.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important
70 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

23. Encouraging collaboration between groups in order to share information concerning

uses of forests and grasslands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on public land management issues.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

25. Allowing for diverse uses of forests and grasslands such as grazing, recreation, and

wildlife habitat.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

26. Making management decisions concerning the use of forests and grasslands at the local

level rather than at the national level.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

27. Increasing the total number of acres in the public land system.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

28. Paying an entry fee that goes to support public land.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

29. Increasing law enforcement efforts by public land agencies on public lands.

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important

30. Allowing public land managers to trade public lands for private lands (for example, to

eliminate private property within public land boundaries or to acquire unique areas of

land).

Not at all Very

important 1 2 3 4 5 important
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 71

Appendix D. Beliefs Statements for the NSRE

Phone Survey

1. Expanding access for motorized off-highway vehicles on forests and grasslands (for example, snowmobiling or 4-wheel driving).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

2. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for motorized vehicles such as snowmobiles or ATVs.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

3. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for non-motorized recreation such as hiking or cross-country skiing.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

4. Designating some existing recreation trails for specific use (for example, creating separate trails for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing, or for mountain biking and horseback riding).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

5. Developing new paved roads on forests and grasslands for access for cars and recreational

vehicles.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

6. Designating more wilderness areas on public land that stops access for development and

motorized uses.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

7. Conserving and protecting forests and grasslands that are the source of our water resources, such as streams, lakes, and watershed areas.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

8. Preserving the natural resources of forests and grasslands through such policies as no

timber harvesting or no mining.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitats.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

10. Preserving the ability to have a “wilderness” experience on forests and grasslands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
72 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

11. Preserving the cultural uses of forests and grasslands by Native Americans and Native

Hispanics such as firewood gathering, herb/berry/plant gathering, and ceremonial access.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

12. Providing natural resources from forests and grasslands to support communities dependent on grazing, mining, or timber harvesting.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

13. Restricting mineral development on forests and grasslands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

14. Restricting timber harvesting and grazing on forests and grasslands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

15. Making the permitting process easier for some established uses of forests and grasslands

such as grazing, logging, mining, and commercial recreation.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

16. Developing a national policy that guides natural resource development of all kinds (for

example, specifies levels of extraction and regulates environmental impacts).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

17. Expanding commercial recreation on forests and grasslands (for example, ski areas,

guide services, or outfitters).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

18. Developing volunteer programs to improve forests and grasslands (for example, planting trees or improving water quality).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

19. Developing volunteer programs to maintain trails and facilities on forests and grasslands

(for example, trail maintenance or campground maintenance).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

20. Informing the public about recreation concerns on forests and grasslands such as safety,

trail etiquette, and respect for wildlife.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

21. Informing the public on the potential environmental impacts of all uses associated with

forests and grasslands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 73

22. Informing the public on the economic value received by developing our natural resources.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

23. Encouraging collaboration between groups in order to share information concerning

uses of forests and grasslands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on public land management issues.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

25. Allowing for diverse uses of forests and grasslands such as grazing, recreation, and

wildlife habitat.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

26. Making management decisions concerning the use of forests and grasslands at the local

level rather than at the national level.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

27. Increasing the total number of acres in the public land system.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

28. Paying an entry fee that goes to support public land.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

29. Increasing law enforcement efforts by public land agencies on public lands.

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree

30. Allowing public land managers to trade public lands for private lands (for example, to

eliminate private property within public land boundaries or to acquire unique areas of

land).

Strongly Strongly

disagree 12345 agree
74 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Appendix E. Attitudes Statements for the NSRE

Phone Survey

1. Expanding access for motorized off-highway vehicles on forests and grasslands (for example, snowmobiling or 4-wheel driving).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

2. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for motorized vehicles such as snowmobiles or ATVs.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

3. Developing and maintaining continuous trail systems that cross both public and private

land for non-motorized recreation such as hiking or cross-country skiing.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

4. Designating some existing recreation trails for specific use (for example, creating separate trails for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing, or for mountain biking and horseback riding).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

5. Developing new paved roads on forests and grasslands for access for cars and recreational

vehicles.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

6. Designating more wilderness areas on public land that stops access for development and

motorized uses.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

7. Conserving and protecting forests and grasslands that are the source of our water resources, such as streams, lakes, and watershed areas.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

8. Preserving the natural resources of forests and grasslands through such policies as no

timber harvesting or no mining.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

9. Protecting ecosystems and wildlife habitats.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

10. Preserving the ability to have a “wilderness” experience on forests and grasslands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 75

11. Preserving the cultural uses of forests and grasslands by Native Americans and Native

Hispanics such as firewood gathering, herb/berry/plant gathering, and ceremonial access.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

12. Providing natural resources from forests and grasslands to support communities dependent on grazing, mining, or timber harvesting.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

13. Restricting mineral development on forests and grasslands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

14. Restricting timber harvesting and grazing on forests and grasslands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

15. Making the permitting process easier for some established uses of forests and grasslands

such as grazing, logging, mining, and commercial recreation.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

16. Developing a national policy that guides natural resource development of all kinds (for

example, specifies levels of extraction and regulates environmental impacts).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

17. Expanding commercial recreation on forests and grasslands (for example, ski areas,

guide services, or outfitters).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

18. Developing volunteer programs to improve forests and grasslands (for example, planting trees or improving water quality).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

19. Developing volunteer programs to maintain trails and facilities on forests and grasslands

(for example, trail maintenance or campground maintenance).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

20. Informing the public about recreation concerns on forests and grasslands such as safety,

trail etiquette, and respect for wildlife.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

21. Informing the public on the potential environmental impacts of all uses associated with

forests and grasslands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

22. Informing the public on the economic value received by developing our natural resources.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable
76 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

23. Encouraging collaboration between groups in order to share information concerning

uses of forests and grasslands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

24. Using public advisory committees to advise on public land management issues.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

25. Allowing for diverse uses of forests and grasslands such as grazing, recreation, and

wildlife habitat.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

26. Making management decisions concerning the use of forests and grasslands at the local

level rather than at the national level.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

27. Increasing the total number of acres in the public land system.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

28. Paying an entry fee that goes to support public land.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

29. Increasing law enforcement efforts by public land agencies on public lands.

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable

30. Allowing public land managers to trade public lands for private lands (for example, to

eliminate private property within public land boundaries or to acquire unique areas of

land).

Very Very

unfavorable 12345 favorable
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 77

Appendix F. USDA Forest Service Familiarity

Questions

Introduction: “We are interested in how familiar you are with the responsibilities of

the United States Forest Service. Based on your knowledge of the Forest Service,

please tell me if you think each of the following statements is TRUE or FALSE, or if

you don’t know.”

FS1—The Forest Service regulates hunting and fishing seasons.

FS2—The Forest Service has Smokey Bear as its mascot.

FS3—The Forest Service enforces the Endangered Species Act.

FS4—The Forest Service manages national forests for recreation, timber, and water.

FS5—The Forest Service provides visitor information and protects wildlife in National

 Parks.
78 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Appendix G. Weighted Means by Demographic

Breakdowns Grouped According to USDA

Forest Service Strategic Plan Objectives

Goal 1: Ecosystem Health: Promote ecosystem health and conservation using a collaborative approach to sustain the Nation’s forests, grasslands, and watersheds.

Strategic Plan Objective 1.a. Improve and protect watershed conditions to provide the

water quality and quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended beneficial water uses (see table G1).

Table G1. Strategic Plan Objective 1.a.: Improve and protect watershed conditions to provide the water quality and

quantity and the soil productivity necessary to support ecological functions and intended beneficial water uses.

Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.73

0.76a

4.68

0.58

4.75

0.81

4.57

0.72

4.75*

0.86

4.68

0.58

4.57

0.72

4.75

0.81

4.75

0.86

18. Develop volunteer programs to

improve land (tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.47

0.72

4.63**

0.88

4.42

0.77

4.65*

0.98

4.47

0.72

4.42

0.77

4.63

0.88

4.65

0.98

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 4.61

0.83

4.57

0.69

4.67

0.84

4.36

0.72

4.57*

0.99

4.57

0.69

4.36*

0.72

4.67

0.84

4.57

0.99

18. Develop volunteer programs to

improve land (tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.48

0.77

4.50

1.02

4.20

0.84

4.42

1.38

4.48

0.77

4.20*

0.84

4.50

1.02

4.42

1.38

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect watersheds 3.91

1.17

3.81

0.93

3.91

1.23

3.71

0.91

4.00**

1.43

3.81

0.93

3.71

0.91

3.91

1.23

4.00

1.43

18. Develop volunteer programs to

improve land (tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

3.76

0.97

3.91

1.26

3.78

0.91

3.81

1.67

3.76

0.97

3.78

0.91

3.91

1.26

3.81

1.67

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 79

Table G2. Strategic Plan Objective 1.b.: Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and

desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species.

Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.84

1.41a

3.70

1.05

3.90*

1.51

3.28

1.14

3.89***

1.66

3.70

1.05

3.28**

1.14

3.90

1.51

3.89

1.66

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

3.99

1.04

4.29***

1.26

3.83

1.05

4.29***

1.46

3.99

1.04

3.83

1.05

4.29

1.26

4.29

1.46

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.58

0.92

4.49

0.76

4.61*

0.98

4.23

0.82

4.62***

1.02

4.49

0.76

4.23**

0.82

4.61

0.98

4.62

1.02

13. Restrict development of

minerals

3.96

1.42

3.88

1.07

4.10*

1.40

3.76

1.05

3.82

1.95

3.88

1.07

3.76

1.05

4.10

1.40

3.82**

1.95

14. Restrict timber harvest and

grazing

3.99

1.27

3.92

0.98

4.09*

1.31

3.56

1.05

3.95**

1.58

3.92

0.98

3.56**

1.05

4.09

1.31

3.95

1.58

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.66

1.46

3.58

1.06

3.84*

1.54

3.09

1.22

3.54*

1.75

3.58

1.06

3.09**

1.22

3.84

1.54

3.54*

1.75

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.05

1.01

4.29*

1.30

3.83

1.06

4.22*

1.57

4.05

1.01

3.83

1.06

4.29

1.30

4.22

1.57

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.53

0.98

4.41

0.78

4.55

1.08

4.40

0.69

4.56

1.14

4.41

0.78

4.40

0.69

4.55

1.08

4.56

1.14

13. Restrict development of

minerals

3.95

1.43

3.80

1.11

4.06*

1.48

3.55

0.95

3.91

1.80

3.80

1.11

3.55

0.95

4.06

1.48

3.91

1.80

14. Restrict timber harvest and

grazing

3.94

1.34

3.71

1.13

4.02*

1.39

3.09

1.23

4.07***

1.47

3.71

1.13

3.09***

1.23

4.02

1.39

4.07

1.47

continued on next page

Strategic Plan Objective 1.b. Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species and to achieve objectives for Management

Indicator Species (MIS)/focal species (see table G2).
80 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 1.c. Increase the amount of forests and grasslands restored to

or maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and

diseases, and invasive species (see table G3).

Table G3. Strategic Plan Objective 1.c.: Increase the amount of forests and grasslands restored to or maintained in a

healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and diseases, and invasive species. Survey

items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

samples Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.58

0.92a

4.49

0.76

4.61*

0.98

4.23

0.82

4.62***

1.02

4.49

0.76

4.23**

0.82

4.61

0.98

4.62

1.02

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.47

0.72

4.63**

0.88

4.42

0.77

4.65*

0.98

4.47

0.72

4.42

0.77

4.63

0.88

4.65

0.98

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

samples Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.53

0.98

4.41

0.78

4.55

1.08

4.40

0.69

4.56

1.14

4.41

0.78

4.40

0.69

4.55

1.08

4.56

1.14

continued on next page

Table G2. Continued.

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.45

1.34

3.34

1.02

3.35

1.46

3.24

0.95

3.65**

1.59

3.34

1.02

3.24

0.95

3.35

1.46

3.65**

1.59

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.61

1.03

3.67

1.38

3.32

0.90

3.69**

1.63

3.61

1.03

3.32*

0.90

3.67

1.38

3.69

1.63

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

3.90

1.16

4.06

0.80

3.89*

1.28

3.97

0.83

3.82

1.42

4.06

0.80

3.97

0.83

3.89

1.28

3.82

1.42

13. Restrict development of

minerals

3.30

1.50

3.57

1.04

3.31**

1.61

3.13

0.96

3.21

1.98

3.57

1.04

3.13**

0.96

3.31

1.61

3.21

1.98

14. Restrict timber harvest and

grazing

3.50

1.36

3.34

1.04

3.55*

1.46

2.96

1.01

3.61***

1.66

3.34

1.04

2.96**

1.01

3.55

1.46

3.61

1.66

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 81

Goal 2: Multiple Benefits to People: Provide a variety of uses, values, products, and

services for present and future generations by managing within the capability of sustainable

ecosystems.

Strategic Plan Objective 2.a. Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities (see table G4).

Table G4. Strategic Plan Objective 2.a.: Improve the capability of the Nation's forests and grasslands to provide

diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.41

1.49a

2.48

1.11

2.28*

1.55

2.43

0.98

2.57

1.97

2.48

1.11

2.43

0.98

2.28

1.55

2.57**

1.97

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.82

1.47

3.06

1.11

2.79**

1.60

2.92

0.98

2.76

1.75

3.06

1.11

2.92

0.98

2.79

1.60

2.76

1.75

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.75

1.33

3.56

0.92

3.80**

1.43

3.27

0.89

3.82***

1.67

3.56

0.92

3.27*

0.89

3.80

1.43

3.82

1.67

4. Designate trails for specific

use

3.59

1.43

3.72

0.98

3.65

1.63

3.83

1.01

3.36**

1.63

3.72

0.98

3.83

1.01

3.65

1.63

3.36**

1.63

5. Develop new paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.59

1.14

2.57

1.64

2.45

1.05

2.76*

1.80

2.59

1.14

2.45

1.05

2.57

1.64

2.76

1.80

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.04

1.45

3.02

1.00

2.87

1.49

3.18

1.03

3.31

1.95

3.02

1.00

3.18

1.03

2.87

1.49

3.31***

1.95

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.04

0.87

4.09

1.31

4.32

0.66

4.34

1.24

4.04

0.87

4.32**

0.66

4.09

1.31

4.34***

1.24

continued on next page

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.48

0.77

4.50

1.02

4.20

0.84

4.42

1.38

4.48

0.77

4.20*

0.84

4.50

1.02

4.42

1.38

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

samples Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

3.90

1.16

4.06

0.80

3.89*

1.28

3.97

0.83

3.82

1.42

4.06

0.80

3.97

0.83

3.89

1.28

3.82

1.42

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve land

(tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

3.76

0.97

3.91

1.26

3.78

0.91

3.81

1.67

3.76

0.97

3.78

0.91

3.91

1.26

3.81

1.67

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

Table G3. Continued.


82 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table G4. Continued.

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.47

0.77

4.58*

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51*

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and

Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.69

0.99

3.65

1.51

3.67

1.22

3.66

1.52

3.69

0.99

3.67

1.22

3.65

1.51

3.66

1.52

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.52

1.50

2.67

1.12

2.50

1.61

2.70

1.17

2.47

1.76

2.67

1.12

2.70

1.17

2.50

1.61

2.47

1.76

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 2.98

1.51

2.95

1.16

2.86

1.71

2.84

1.04

3.22

1.72

2.95

1.16

2.84

1.04

2.86

1.71

3.22**

1.72

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.71

1.37

3.45

1.07

3.75*

1.49

3.19

0.96

3.82**

1.59

3.45

1.07

3.19

0.96

3.75

1.49

3.82

1.59

4. Designate trails for specific

use

3.94

1.25

4.11

0.93

3.92

1.34

4.00

0.92

3.88

1.53

4.11

0.93

4.00

0.92

3.92

1.34

3.88

1.53

5. Develop new paved roads 2.70

1.57

2.65

1.05

2.53

1.67

2.24

0.95

3.02**

2.05

2.65

1.05

2.24*

0.95

2.53

1.67

3.02***

2.05

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.25

1.53

3.20

1.05

3.15

1.63

2.87

1.00

3.48**

1.97

3.20

1.05

2.87*

1.00

3.15

1.63

3.48***

1.97

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.18

0.85

4.20

1.18

4.18

0.82

4.28

1.31

4.18

0.85

4.18

0.82

4.20

1.18

4.28

1.31

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and

Grasslands

3.69

1.43

3.64

0.95

3.81

1.49

3.51

0.89

3.61

1.93

3.64

0.95

3.51

0.89

3.81

1.49

3.61

1.93

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.97

1.45

3.06

1.03

2.95

1.61

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.82

3.06

1.03

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.61

2.95

1.82

2. Trails for motorized vehicles 3.25

1.38

3.24

0.94

3.24

1.51

3.24

0.96

3.29

1.71

3.24

0.94

3.24

0.96

3.24

1.51

3.29

1.71

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.59

1.27

3.54

0.93

3.53

1.36

3.34

1.09

3.74**

1.57

3.54

0.93

3.34

1.09

3.53

1.36

3.74*

1.57

4. Designate trails for specific

use

3.61

1.33

3.82

0.90

3.54**

1.47

3.56

0.90

3.62

1.72

3.82

0.90

3.56*

0.90

3.54

1.47

3.62

1.72

5. Develop new paved roads 3.19

1.43

3.21

1.02

3.35

1.54

2.89

0.91

3.01

1.80

3.21

1.02

2.89*

0.91

3.35

1.54

3.01**

1.80

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 83

Strategic Plan Objective 2.b. Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas

to sustain a desired range of benefits and values (see table G5).

Table G5. Strategic Plan Objective 2.b.: Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas to sustain a

desired range of benefits and values. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.84

1.41a

3.70

1.05

3.90*

1.51

3.28

1.14

3.89***

1.66

3.70

1.05

3.28**

1.14

3.90

1.51

3.89

1.66

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

3.99

1.04

4.29***

1.26

3.83

1.05

4.29***

1.46

3.99

1.04

3.83

1.05

4.29

1.26

4.29

1.46

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.58

0.92

4.49

0.76

4.61*

0.98

4.23

0.82

4.62***

1.02

4.49

0.76

4.23**

0.82

4.61

0.98

4.62

1.02

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

4.15

1.28

3.96

1.01

4.25***

1.31

4.21

0.77

4.08

1.65

3.96

1.01

4.21*

0.77

4.25

1.31

4.08*

1.65

continued on next page

Table G4. Continued.

17. Expand commercial recreation 3.45

1.24

3.31

0.99

3.42

1.35

3.34

0.82

3.58*

1.49

3.31

0.99

3.34

0.82

3.42

1.35

3.58

1.49

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

3.79

1.21

3.93

0.86

3.83

1.28

3.70

0.96

3.68

1.53

3.93

0.86

3.70

0.96

3.83

1.28

3.68

1.53

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail

etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and

Grasslands

3.61

1.36

3.73

0.89

3.56

1.55

3.40

1.03

3.66*

1.63

3.73

0.89

3.40*

1.03

3.56

1.55

3.66

1.63

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

9. I would pay $5 more to use

public lands for recreation

3.49

1.60

3.31

1.24

3.56**

1.70

3.24

1.10

3.49*

1.98

3.31

1.24

3.24

1.10

3.56

1.70

3.49

1.98

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
84 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table G5. Continued.

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

East West Non-metro Metro Survey item number and

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.66

1.46

3.58

1.06

3.84*

1.54

3.09

1.22

3.54*

1.75

3.58

1.06

3.09**

1.22

3.84

1.54

3.54*

1.75

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.05

1.01

4.29*

1.30

3.83

1.06

4.22*

1.57

4.05

1.01

3.83

1.06

4.29

1.30

4.22

1.57

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

4.53

0.98

4.41

0.78

4.55

1.08

4.40

0.69

4.56

1.14

4.41

0.78

4.40

0.69

4.55

1.08

4.56

1.14

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

4.22

1.14

4.22

0.86

4.25

1.23

3.83

0.97

4.24**

1.33

4.22

0.86

3.83***

0.97

4.25

1.23

4.24

1.33

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

6. Designate more wilderness to

stop development & motorized

access

3.45

1.34

3.34

1.02

3.35

1.46

3.24

0.95

3.65**

1.59

3.34

1.02

3.24

0.95

3.35

1.46

3.65**

1.59

8. Preserve natural resources

through policies such as no

timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.61

1.03

3.67

1.38

3.32

0.90

3.69**

1.63

3.61

1.03

3.32*

0.90

3.67

1.38

3.69

1.63

9. Protecting ecosystems and

wildlife habitat

3.90

1.16

4.06

0.80

3.89*

1.28

3.97

0.83

3.82

1.42

4.06

0.80

3.97

0.83

3.89

1.28

3.82

1.42

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

3.88

1.10

3.92

0.80

3.87

1.18

3.83

0.83

3.90

1.36

3.92

0.80

3.83

0.83

3.87

1.18

3.90

1.36

a Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 85

Strategic Plan Objective 2.c. Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services (see

table G6).

Table G6. Strategic Plan Objective 2.c.: Improve the capability of the Nation's forests and rangelands to provide

desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services. Survey items are from the VOBA module of

the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.78

0.97

3.85

1.51

3.69

1.06

3.82

1.68

3.78

0.97

3.69

1.06

3.85

1.51

3.82

1.68

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.60

1.39

3.65

1.03

3.66

1.53

3.80

0.89

3.44**

1.70

3.65

1.03

3.80

0.89

3.66

1.53

3.44*

1.70

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

2.89

1.55

2.90

1.14

2.82

1.69

3.08

1.06

2.96

1.91

2.90

1.14

3.08

1.06

2.82

1.69

2.96

1.91

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

4.26

1.23

4.05

0.97

4.32**

1.31

3.71

0.98

4.31***

1.40

4.05

0.97

3.71**

0.98

4.32

1.31

4.31

1.40

18. Develop volunteer programs

to improve land (tree

planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86

4.47

0.72

4.63**

0.88

4.42

0.77

4.65*

0.98

4.47

0.72

4.42

0.77

4.63

0.88

4.65

0.98

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.00

0.93

4.16*

1.20

4.11

0.87

3.95

1.48

4.00

0.93

4.11

0.87

4.16

1.20

3.95**

1.48

27. Increase total number of

acres in National Forest and

Grassland system

3.81

1.42

3.64

0.97

3.97***

1.49

3.19

1.07

3.75***

1.82

3.64

0.97

3.19**

1.07

3.97

1.49

3.75*

1.82

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.80

1.03

3.81

1.39

3.21

1.05

3.73**

1.78

3.80

1.03

3.21***

1.05

3.81

1.39

3.73

1.78

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.29

1.39

3.26

1.02

3.38

1.54

3.43

0.93

3.13

1.64

3.26

1.02

3.43

0.93

3.38

1.54

3.13*

1.64

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

2.90

1.59

2.94

1.17

2.73

1.70

2.94

1.09

3.15

2.02

2.94

1.17

2.94

1.09

2.73

1.70

3.15*

2.02

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

4.21

1.19

4.08

1.05

4.27*

1.21

4.02

0.81

4.20

1.46

4.08

1.05

4.02

0.81

4.27

1.21

4.20

1.46

18. Develop volunteer programs

to improve land (tree

planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.48

0.77

4.50

1.02

4.20

0.84

4.42

1.38

4.48

0.77

4.20*

0.84

4.50

1.02

4.42

1.38

continued on next page
86 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 2.d. Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and members of underserved and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services (see table G7).

Table G7. Strategic Plan Objective 2.d.: Increase accessibility to a diversity of people and members of underserved

and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and services. Survey items are from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.78

0.97

3.85

1.51

3.69

1.06

3.82

1.68

3.78

0.97

3.69

1.06

3.85

1.51

3.82

1.68

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.60

1.39

3.65

1.03

3.66

1.53

3.80

0.89

3.44**

1.70

3.65

1.03

3.80

0.89

3.66

1.53

3.44*

1.70

continued on next page

Table G6. Continued.

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

4.03

0.90

4.03

1.25

4.17

0.74

3.96

1.37

4.03

0.90

4.17

0.74

4.03

1.25

3.96

1.37

27. Increase total number of

acres in National Forest and

Grassland system

3.95

1.47

3.81

1.02

3.90

1.54

3.32

1.05

4.15***

1.85

3.81

1.02

3.32**

1.05

3.90

1.54

4.15*

1.85

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.51

0.97

3.24**

1.63

3.55

0.95

3.56

1.45

3.51

0.97

3.55

0.95

3.24

1.63

3.56***

1.45

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.45

1.30

3.46

0.93

3.57

1.41

3.04

0.98

3.35*

1.55

3.46

0.93

3.04***

0.98

3.57

1.41

3.35*

1.55

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

3.05

1.43

3.16

1.09

3.05

1.55

3.24

0.97

2.95*

1.84

3.16

1.09

3.24

0.97

3.05

1.55

2.95

1.84

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

3.51

1.26

3.61

0.91

3.53

1.41

3.17

0.92

3.50**

1.51

3.61

0.91

3.17***

0.92

3.53

1.41

3.50

1.51

18. Develop volunteer programs

to improve land (tree

planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

3.76

0.97

3.91

1.26

3.78

0.91

3.81

1.67

3.76

0.97

3.78

0.91

3.91

1.26

3.81

1.67

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.72

0.88

3.71

1.15

3.76

0.82

3.76

1.68

3.72

0.88

3.76

0.82

3.71

1.15

3.76

1.68

27. Increase total number of

acres in National Forest and

Grassland system

3.52

1.45

3.51

0.91

3.42

1.42

3.68

0.92

3.62

2.11

3.51

0.91

3.68

0.92

3.42

1.42

3.62

2.11

a Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 87

Table G7. Continued.

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

2.89

1.55

2.90

1.14

2.82

1.69

3.08

1.06

2.96

1.91

2.90

1.14

3.08

1.06

2.82

1.69

2.96

1.91

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

4.26

1.23

4.05

0.97

4.32**

1.31

3.71

0.98

4.31***

1.40

4.05

0.97

3.71**

0.98

4.32

1.31

4.31

1.40

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.93

1.22

4.07

0.85

3.84**

1.40

3.91

0.84

3.99

1.40

4.07

0.85

3.91

0.84

3.84

1.40

3.99

1.40

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.80

1.03

3.81

1.39

3.21

1.05

3.73**

1.78

3.80

1.03

3.21***

1.05

3.81

1.39

3.73

1.78

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.29

1.39

3.26

1.02

3.38

1.54

3.43

0.93

3.13

1.64

3.26

1.02

3.43

0.93

3.38

1.54

3.13*

1.64

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

2.90

1.59

2.94

1.17

2.73

1.70

2.94

1.09

3.15

2.02

2.94

1.17

2.94

1.09

2.73

1.70

3.15***

2.02

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

4.21

1.19

4.08

1.05

4.27*

1.21

4.02

0.81

4.20

1.46

4.08

1.05

4.02

0.81

4.27

1.21

4.20

1.46

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.88

1.34

4.04

0.94

3.81*

1.44

4.41

0.80

3.83**

1.69

4.04

0.94

4.41*

0.80

3.81

1.44

3.83

1.69

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.51

0.97

3.24**

1.63

3.55

0.95

3.56

1.45

3.51

0.97

3.55

0.95

3.24

1.63

3.56***

1.45

12. Provide natural resources to

dependent communities

3.45

1.30

3.46

0.93

3.57

1.41

3.04

0.98

3.35*

1.55

3.46

0.93

3.04***

0.98

3.57

1.41

3.35*

1.55

15. Make the permitting process

easier for established uses

3.05

1.43

3.16

1.09

3.05

1.55

3.24

0.97

2.95*

1.84

3.16

1.09

3.24

0.97

3.05

1.55

2.95

1.84

16. Develop a national policy

for natural resource

development

3.51

1.26

3.61

0.91

3.53

1.41

3.17

0.92

3.50**

1.51

3.61

0.91

3.17***

0.92

3.53

1.41

3.50

1.51

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.49

1.32

3.63

0.98

3.42*

1.39

3.56

0.94

3.52

1.68

3.63

0.98

3.56

0.94

3.42

1.39

3.52

1.68

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
88 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 2.e. Improve delivery of services to urban communities (see

table G8).

Table G8. Strategic Plan Objective 2.e.: Improve delivery of services to urban communities. Survey items are from

the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.41

1.49a

2.48

1.11

2.28*

1.55

2.43

0.98

2.57

1.97

2.48

1.11

2.43

0.98

2.28

1.55

2.57**

1.97

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

2.82

1.47

3.06

1.11

2.79**

1.60

2.92

0.98

2.76

1.75

3.06

1.11

2.92

0.98

2.79

1.60

2.76

1.75

3. Trails for nonmotorized recreation

3.75

1.33

3.56

0.92

3.80**

1.43

3.27

0.89

3.82***

1.67

3.56

0.92

3.27*

0.89

3.80

1.43

3.82

1.67

4. Designate trails for

specific use

3.59

1.43

3.72

0.98

3.65

1.63

3.83

1.01

3.36**

1.63

3.72

0.98

3.83

1.01

3.65

1.63

3.36**

1.63

5. Develop new paved

roads

2.62

1.49

2.59

1.14

2.57

1.64

2.45

1.05

2.76*

1.80

2.59

1.14

2.45

1.05

2.57

1.64

2.76

1.80

10. Preserve "wilderness"

experience

4.15

1.28

3.96

1.01

4.25***

1.31

4.21

0.77

4.08

1.65

3.96

1.01

4.21*

0.77

4.25

1.31

4.08*

1.65

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.04

1.45

3.02

1.00

2.87

1.49

3.18

1.03

3.31

1.95

3.02

1.00

3.18

1.03

2.87

1.49

3.31***

1.95

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.52

1.50

2.67

1.12

2.50

1.61

2.70

1.17

2.47

1.76

2.67

1.12

2.70

1.17

2.50

1.61

2.47

1.76

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

2.98

1.51

2.95

1.16

2.86

1.71

2.84

1.04

3.22

1.72

2.95

1.16

2.84

1.04

2.86

1.71

3.22**

1.72

3. Trails for nonmotorized recreation

3.71

1.37

3.45

1.07

3.75*

1.49

3.19

0.96

3.82**

1.59

3.45

1.07

3.19

0.96

3.75

1.49

3.82

1.59

4. Designate trails for

specific use

3.94

1.25

4.11

0.93

3.92

1.34

4.00

0.92

3.88

1.53

4.11

0.93

4.00

0.92

3.92

1.34

3.88

1.53

5. Develop new paved

roads

2.70

1.57

2.65

1.05

2.53

1.67

2.24

0.95

3.02**

2.05

2.65

1.05

2.24*

0.95

2.53

1.67

3.02***

2.05

10. Preserve "wilderness"

experience

4.22

1.14

4.22

0.86

4.25

1.23

3.83

0.97

4.24**

1.33

4.22

0.86

3.83***

0.97

4.25

1.23

4.24

1.33

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.25

1.53

3.20

1.05

3.15

1.63

2.87

1.00

3.48**

1.97

3.20

1.05

2.87*

1.00

3.15

1.63

3.48**

1.97

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 89

Goal 3: Scientific and Technical Assistance: Develop and use the best scientific information available to deliver technical and community assistance and to support ecological,

economic, and social sustainability.

Strategic Plan Objective 3.a. Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental,

and social change related to natural resources (see table G9).

Table G9. Strategic Plan Objective 3.a.: Better assist in building the capacity of Tribal governments, rural

communities, and private landowners to adapt to economic, environmental, and social change related to

natural resources. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.78

0.97

3.85

1.51

3.69

1.06

3.82

1.68

3.78

0.97

3.69

1.06

3.85

1.51

3.82

1.68

20. Inform public about

recreation concerns (safety,

trail etiquette, etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.47

0.77

4.58*

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51*

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

continued on next page

Table G8. Continued.

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.97

1.45

3.06

1.03

2.95

1.61

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.82

3.06

1.03

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.61

2.95

1.82

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

3.25

1.38

3.24

0.94

3.24

1.51

3.24

0.96

3.29

1.71

3.24

0.94

3.24

0.96

3.24

1.51

3.29

1.71

3. Trails for nonmotorized recreation

3.59

1.27

3.54

0.93

3.53

1.36

3.34

1.09

3.74**

1.57

3.54

0.93

3.34

1.09

3.53

1.36

3.74*

1.57

4. Designate trails for

specific use

3.61

1.33

3.82

0.90

3.54**

1.47

3.56

0.90

3.62

1.72

3.82

0.90

3.56*

0.90

3.54

1.47

3.62

1.72

5. Develop new paved

roads

3.19

1.43

3.21

1.02

3.35

1.54

2.89

0.91

3.01

1.80

3.21

1.02

2.89*

0.91

3.35

1.54

3.01**

1.80

10. Preserve "wilderness"

experience

3.88

1.10

3.92

0.80

3.87

1.18

3.83

0.83

3.90

1.36

3.92

0.80

3.83

0.83

3.87

1.18

3.90

1.36

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.45

1.24

3.31

0.99

3.42

1.35

3.34

0.82

3.58*

1.49

3.31

0.99

3.34

0.82

3.42

1.35

3.58

1.49

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
90 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table G9. Continued.

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of

uses

4.39

1.02

4.29

0.82

4.54***

0.94

3.86

0.95

4.31***

1.37

4.29

0.82

3.86***

0.95

4.54

0.94

4.31**

1.37

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

3.93

1.03

4.10*

1.36

3.90

1.06

3.95

1.55

3.93

1.03

3.90

1.06

4.10

1.36

3.95

1.55

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.23

0.80

4.23

1.23

3.93

0.85

4.03

1.64

4.23

0.80

3.93**

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.03*

1.64

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.90

1.20

3.83

0.94

3.96

1.23

3.66

0.79

3.89*

1.56

3.83

0.94

3.66

0.79

3.96

1.23

3.89

1.56

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.93

1.22

4.07

0.85

3.84**

1.40

3.91

0.84

3.99

1.40

4.07

0.85

3.91

0.84

3.84

1.40

3.99

1.40

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.80

1.03

3.81

1.39

3.21

1.05

3.73**

1.78

3.80

1.03

3.21

1.05

3.81***

1.39

3.73

1.78

20. Inform public about

recreation concerns (safety,

trail etiquette, etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of

uses

4.48

1.00

4.32

0.78

4.48

1.10

4.46

0.64

4.54

1.18

4.32

0.78

4.46

0.64

4.48

1.10

4.54

1.18

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.08

1.17

4.20

0.85

4.11

1.28

3.93

0.94

3.99

1.39

4.20

0.85

3.93

0.94

4.11*

1.28

3.99

1.39

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.17

4.21

0.82

4.12

1.30

4.07

0.84

4.19

1.42

4.21

0.82

4.07

0.84

4.12

1.30

4.19

1.42

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.84

1.25

4.04

0.85

3.74*

1.41

3.98

0.91

3.92

1.44

4.04

0.85

3.98

0.91

3.74

1.41

3.92

1.44

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.88

1.34

4.04

0.94

3.81*

1.44

4.41

0.80

3.83**

1.69

4.04

0.94

4.41

0.80

3.81*

1.44

3.83

1.69

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.51

0.97

3.24**

1.63

3.55

0.95

3.56

1.45

3.51

0.97

3.55

0.95

3.24

1.63

3.56***

1.45

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 91

Strategic Plan Objective 3.b. Increase the effectiveness of scientific, developmental,

and technical information delivered to domestic and international interests (see table G10).

Table G10. Strategic Plan Objective 3.b.: Increase the effectiveness of scientific, developmental, and technical

information delivered to domestic and international interests. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.47

0.77

4.58*

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51*

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.29

0.82

4.54***

0.94

3.86

0.95

4.31***

1.37

4.29

0.82

3.86***

0.95

4.54

0.94

4.31**

1.37

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

3.93

1.03

4.10*

1.36

3.90

1.06

3.95

1.55

3.93

1.03

3.90

1.06

4.10

1.36

3.95

1.55

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.23

0.80

4.23

1.23

3.93

0.85

4.03

1.64

4.23

0.80

3.93**

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.03*

1.64

continued on next page

Table G9. Continued.

20. Inform public about

recreation concerns (safety,

trail etiquette, etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of

uses

3.50

1.33

3.61

0.97

3.48

1.39

3.40

0.90

3.50

1.77

3.61

0.97

3.40

0.90

3.48

1.39

3.50

1.77

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

3.40

1.38

3.38

1.00

3.38

1.47

3.42

1.07

3.43

1.72

3.38

1.00

3.42

1.07

3.38

1.47

3.43

1.72

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.67

0.90

3.65

1.40

3.76

0.80

3.83

1.46

3.67

0.90

3.76

0.80

3.65

1.40

3.83*

1.46

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.36

1.26

3.39

0.93

3.35

1.48

3.34

0.82

3.35

1.42

3.39

0.93

3.34

0.82

3.35

1.48

3.35

1.42

26. Make management decisions

at local level (rather than

national)

3.49

1.32

3.63

0.98

3.42*

1.39

3.56

0.94

3.52

1.68

3.63

0.98

3.56

0.94

3.42

1.39

3.52

1.68

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
92 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 3.c. Improve the knowledge base provided through research,

inventory, and monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including

human uses, and to support decision-making and sustainable management of the Nation’s

forests and grasslands (see table G11).

Table G10. Continued.

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.32

0.78

4.48

1.10

4.46

0.64

4.54

1.18

4.32

0.78

4.46

0.64

4.48

1.10

4.54

1.18

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.08

1.17

4.20

0.85

4.11

1.28

3.93

0.94

3.99

1.39

4.20

0.85

3.93*

0.94

4.11

1.28

3.99

1.39

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.17

4.21

0.82

4.12

1.30

4.07

0.84

4.19

1.42

4.21

0.82

4.07

0.84

4.12

1.30

4.19

1.42

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.61

0.97

3.48

1.39

3.40

0.90

3.50

1.77

3.61

0.97

3.40

0.90

3.48

1.39

3.50

1.77

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

3.40

1.38

3.38

1.00

3.38

1.47

3.42

1.07

3.43

1.72

3.38

1.00

3.42

1.07

3.38

1.47

3.43

1.72

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.67

0.90

3.65

1.40

3.76

0.80

3.83

1.46

3.67

0.90

3.76

0.80

3.65

1.40

3.83*

1.46

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 93

Table G11. Strategic Plan Objective 3.c.: Improve the knowledge base provided through research, inventory, and

monitoring to enhance scientific understanding of ecosystems, including human uses, and to support decisionmaking and sustainable management of the Nation's forests and grasslands. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.53

0.93a

4.47

0.77

4.58*

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51*

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.29

0.82

4.54***

0.94

3.86

0.95

4.31***

1.37

4.29

0.82

3.86***

0.95

4.54

0.94

4.31**

1.37

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

3.93

1.03

4.10*

1.36

3.90

1.06

3.95

1.55

3.93

1.03

3.90

1.06

4.10

1.36

3.95

1.55

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.23

0.80

4.23

1.23

3.93

0.85

4.03

1.64

4.23

0.80

3.93**

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.03*

1.64

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.32

0.78

4.48

1.10

4.46

0.64

4.54

1.18

4.32

0.78

4.46

0.64

4.48

1.10

4.54

1.18

22. Inform public on economic

value from developing natural

resources

4.08

1.17

4.20

0.85

4.11

1.28

3.93

0.94

3.99

1.39

4.20

0.85

3.93*

0.94

4.11

1.28

3.99

1.39

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.17

4.21

0.82

4.12

1.30

4.07

0.84

4.19

1.42

4.21

0.82

4.07

0.84

4.12

1.30

4.19

1.42

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

21. Inform public on potential

environmental impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.61

0.97

3.48

1.39

3.40

0.90

3.50

1.77

3.61

0.97

3.40

0.90

3.48

1.39

3.50

1.77

22. Inform public on economic 3.40

1.38

3.38

1.00

3.38

1.47

3.42

1.07

3.43

1.72

3.38

1.00

3.42

1.07

3.38

1.47

3.43

value from developing natural 1.72

resources

continued on next page
94 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 3.d. Broaden the participation of less traditional research groups

in research and technical assistance programs (see table G12).

Goal 4: Effective Public Service: Ensure the acquisition and use of an appropriate corporate infrastructure to enable the efficient delivery of a variety of uses.

Strategic Plan Objective 4.a. Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability (see table G13).table G13).

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.67

0.90

3.65

1.40

3.76

0.80

3.83

1.46

3.67

0.90

3.76

0.80

3.65

1.40

3.83*

1.46

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 

Table G11. Continued. 

Table G12. Strategic Plan Objective 3.d.: Broaden the participation of less traditional research groups in research

and technical assistance programs. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.20a

4.23

0.80

4.23

1.23

3.93

0.85

4.03

1.64

4.23

0.80

3.93**

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.03*

1.64

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

4.15

1.17

4.21

0.82

4.12

1.30

4.07

0.84

4.19

1.42

4.21

0.82

4.07

0.84

4.12

1.30

4.19

1.42

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

23. Encourage collaboration

between groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.67

0.90

3.65

1.40

3.76

0.80

3.83

1.46

3.67

0.90

3.76

0.80

3.65

1.40

3.83*

1.46

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 95

Strategic Plan Objective 4.b. Improve the safety and economy of USDA Forest Service

roads, trails, facilities, and operations and provide greater security for the public and

employees (see table G14).

Table G13. Strategic Plan Objective 4.a.: Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability. Survey

item is from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

24. Federal government should

subsidize development and

leasing of public lands

2.32

1.58a

2.33

1.15

2.28

1.73

2.09

0.98

2.42**

1.95

2.33

1.15

2.09*

0.98

2.28

1.73

2.42

1.95

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 

Table G14. Strategic Plan Objective 4.b.: Improve the safety and economy of USDA Forest Service roads, trails,

facilities, and operations and provide greater security for the public and employees. Survey items are from the

VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13a

4.04

0.87

4.09

1.31

4.32

0.66

4.34

1.24

4.04

0.87

4.32**

0.66

4.09

1.31

4.34***

1.24

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.47

0.77

4.58*

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51*

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and

Grasslands

4.01

1.21

3.96

0.97

3.98

1.30

3.65

0.88

4.12***

1.50

3.96

0.97

3.65*

0.88

3.98

1.30

4.12

1.50

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.18

0.85

4.20

1.18

4.18

0.82

4.28

1.31

4.18

0.85

4.18

0.82

4.20

1.18

4.28

1.31

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and

Grasslands

4.01

1.26

4.08

0.91

4.09

1.31

4.03

0.83

3.87

1.68

4.08

0.91

4.03

0.83

4.09

1.31

3.87*

1.68

continued on next page
96 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Strategic Plan Objective 4.f. Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands

and ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs (see

table G15).

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

19. Develop volunteer programs to

improve facilities (trails, etc.)

3.79

1.21

3.93

0.86

3.83

1.28

3.70

0.96

3.68

1.53

3.93

0.86

3.70

0.96

3.83

1.28

3.68

1.53

20. Inform public about recreation

concerns (safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and

Grasslands

3.85

1.27

3.85

0.95

3.89

1.37

3.48

0.98

3.85*

1.61

3.85

0.95

3.48**

0.98

3.89

1.37

3.85

1.61

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

Table G14. Continued.



Table G15. Strategic Plan Objective 4.f.: Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands and ensure

nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs. Survey items are from the VOBA

module of the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1= not at all important, 5= very important )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.82

1.38a

3.78

0.97

3.85

1.51

3.69

1.06

3.82

1.68

3.78

0.97

3.69

1.06

3.85

1.51

3.82

1.68

12. Provide natural resources

to dependent communities

3.60

1.39

3.65

1.03

3.66

1.53

3.80

0.89

3.44**

1.70

3.65

1.03

3.80

0.89

3.66

1.53

3.44*

1.70

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

2.90

1.14

2.82

1.69

3.08

1.06

2.96

1.91

2.90

1.14

3.08

1.06

2.82

1.69

2.96

1.91

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.04

1.45

3.02

1.00

2.87

1.49

3.18

1.03

3.31

1.95

3.02

1.00

3.18

1.03

2.87

1.49

3.31***

1.95

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.00

0.93

4.16*

1.20

4.11

0.87

3.95

1.48

4.00

0.93

4.11

0.87

4.16

1.20

3.95**

1.48

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.75

1.36

3.80

1.03

3.81

1.39

3.21

1.05

3.73**

1.78

3.80

1.03

3.21***

1.05

3.81

1.39

3.73

1.78

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 97

Table G15. Continued.

12. Provide natural resources

to dependent communities

3.45

1.30

3.46

0.93

3.57

1.41

3.04

0.98

3.35*

1.55

3.46

0.93

3.04***

0.98

3.57

1.41

3.35*

1.55

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

3.05

1.43

3.16

1.09

3.05

1.55

3.24

0.97

2.95*

1.84

3.16

1.09

3.24

0.97

3.05

1.55

2.95

1.84

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.45

1.24

3.31

0.99

3.42

1.35

3.34

0.82

3.58*

1.49

3.31

0.99

3.34

0.82

3.42

1.35

3.58

1.49

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.72

0.88

3.71

1.15

3.76

0.82

3.76

1.68

3.72

0.88

3.76

0.82

3.71

1.15

3.76

1.68

a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001

12. Provide natural resources

to dependent communities

3.29

1.39

3.26

1.02

3.38

1.54

3.43

0.93

3.13

1.64

3.26

1.02

3.43

0.93

3.38

1.54

3.13*

1.64

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

2.90

1.59

2.94

1.17

2.73

1.70

2.94

1.09

3.15

2.02

2.94

1.17

2.94

1.09

2.73

1.70

3.15***

2.02

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.25

1.53

3.20

1.05

3.15

1.63

2.87

1.00

3.48**

1.97

3.20

1.05

2.87*

1.00

3.15

1.63

3.48**

1.97

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

4.03

0.90

4.03

1.25

4.17

0.74

3.96

1.37

4.03

0.90

4.17

0.74

4.03

1.25

3.96

1.37

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1= very unfavorable, 5= very favorable )

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

11. Preserve cultural uses 3.39

1.37

3.51

0.97

3.24**

1.63

3.55

0.95

3.56

1.45

3.51

0.97

3.55

0.95

3.24

1.63

3.56***

1.45
98 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Appendix H. Weighted Means by Demographic

Breakdowns Grouped by Public Lands Values

Socially Responsible Individual Values (see table H1).

Socially Responsible Management Values (see table H2).

Table H1. Socially Responsible Individual Values. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National

Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. People should be more

concerned about how pub

lands are used

4.75

0.72a

4.74

0.57

4.79

0.70

4.61

0.55

4.71

1.01

4.74

0.57

4.61*

0.55

4.79

0.70

4.71

1.01

2. Natural resources must be

preserved, even if some

people must do without

4.14

1.22

3.83

1.04

4.23***

1.23

4.22

0.85

4.11

1.51

3.83

1.04

4.22***

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.11

1.51

3. Consumers should be

interested in environmental

consequences of purchases

4.47

1.05

4.63

0.60

4.46**

1.18

4.27

0.88

4.46

1.28

4.63

0.60

4.27***

0.88

4.46

1.18

4.46

1.28

4. I would be willing to sign a

petition for an

environmental cause

4.03

1.43

3.92

1.05

3.99

1.58

3.48

1.20

4.20***

1.58

3.92

1.05

3.48**

1.20

3.99

1.58

4.20*

1.58

5r. The whole pollution issue

has upset me, I feel it s not

overrated (reverse scored)

3.68

1.51

3.65

1.11

3.69

1.69

3.47

1.20

3.71

1.72

3.65

1.11

3.47

1.20

3.69

1.69

3.71

1.72

6. If we could just get by with

less, more for future

generations

3.99

1.35

4.12

0.96

4.03

1.50

3.98

0.98

3.86

1.59

4.12

0.96

3.98

0.98

4.03

1.50

3.86

1.59

7. Manufacturers should be

encouraged to use recycled

materials

4.69

0.82

4.64

0.63

4.66

0.91

4.56

0.54

4.77**

0.94

4.64

0.63

4.56

0.54

4.66

0.91

4.77*

0.94

8. Future generations should

be as important as current in

public lands decisions

4.52

0.97

4.54

0.69

4.62

0.95

4.42

0.78

4.36

1.32

4.54

0.69

4.42

0.78

4.62

0.95

4.36***

1.32

9. I would pay $5 more to use

public lands for recreation

3.49

1.60

3.31

1.24

3.56**

1.70

3.24

1.10

3.49*

1.98

3.31

1.24

3.24

1.10

3.56

1.70

3.49

1.98

10. People should urge friends

to limit use of scarce

resources

4.14

1.25

4.23

0.84

4.09

1.41

3.98

0.94

4.19*

1.48

4.23

0.84

3.98*

0.94

4.09

1.41

4.19

1.48

continued on next page
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 99

Table H1. Continued.

11. I am glad there are National

Forests even if I never see

them

4.66

0.91

4.76

0.52

4.74

0.82

4.52

0.68

4.54

1.37

4.76

0.52

4.52**

0.68

4.74

0.82

4.54**

1.37

12. People can think public

lands are valuable even if

they don’t go there

4.46

1.07

4.65

0.59

4.58

0.99

4.61

0.58

4.19***

1.65

4.65

0.59

4.61

0.58

4.58

0.99

4.19***

1.65

13. I am willing to stop buying

from polluting companies

3.95

1.35

4.07

0.97

3.99

1.38

3.76

0.94

3.88

1.82

4.07

0.97

3.76**

0.94

3.99

1.38

3.88

1.82

14. I am willing to make

personal sacrifices to slow

pollution

4.44

1.05

4.42

0.80

4.42

1.10

4.51

0.68

4.46

1.36

4.42

0.80

4.51

0.68

4.42

1.10

4.46

1.36

15. Forests have a right to exist

for their own sake

4.11

1.28

3.93

1.01

4.19**

1.34

3.92

0.95

4.09

1.56

3.93

1.01

3.92

0.95

4.19

1.34

4.09

1.56

16. Wildlife, plants, and

humans have equal rights

4.28

1.26

4.15

0.98

4.34*

1.37

3.90

1.18

4.31**

1.36

4.15

0.98

3.90

1.18

4.34

1.37

4.31

1.36

17. Donating time or money to

worthy causes is important

to me

4.25

1.05

4.18

0.82

4.26

1.17

3.88

0.83

4.36***

1.15

4.18

0.82

3.88**

0.83

4.26

1.17

4.36

1.15

Group Mean 4.24 4.22 4.27 4.08 4.22 4.22 4.08 4.27 4.22 a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
100 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table H2. Socially Responsible Management Values. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National

Survey on Recreation and the Environment.

Values

with respect to forests and grasslands

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

18. We should actively harvest

more trees for larger human

population

2.88

1.77a

2.61

1.18

2.92**

2.00

2.77

1.16

2.94

2.14

2.61

1.18

2.77

1.16

2.92

2.00

2.94

2.14

19. The most important role for

public lands is providing jobs,

income for locals

3.23

1.53

3.42

1.09

3.10***

1.62

3.35

1.07

3.34

1.97

3.42

1.09

3.35

1.07

3.10

1.62

3.34**

1.97

20. The decision to develop

resources should be made

mostly on economic grounds

2.92

1.51

3.12

1.10

2.92*

1.70

3.09

1.06

2.78**

1.73

3.12

1.10

3.09

1.06

2.92

1.70

2.78

1.73

21. The main reason for

maintaining resources now is

to develop in future

4.00

1.39

4.09

0.95

3.90**

1.51

3.92

0.99

4.10

1.78

4.09

0.95

3.92

0.99

3.90

1.51

4.10

1.78

22. I think public land managers

are doing an adequate job of

protecting natural resources

3.18

1.31

3.44

0.96

3.05***

1.38

3.39

0.95

3.24

1.66

3.44

0.96

3.39

0.95

3.05

1.38

3.24*

1.66

23. The primary use of forests

should be for products useful

for humans

2.95

1.64

3.09

1.19

2.83**

1.73

3.01

1.16

3.07

2.06

3.09

1.19

3.01

1.16

2.83

1.73

3.07**

2.06

24. The Federal government

should subsidize development

and leasing of public lands

2.32

1.58

2.33

1.15

2.28

1.73

2.09

0.98

2.42**

1.95

2.33

1.15

2.09*

0.98

2.28

1.73

2.42

1.95

25. The government has better

places to spend money than on

strong conservation program

2.33

1.48

2.52

1.08

2.31**

1.58

2.30

1.00

2.28

1.89

2.52

1.08

2.30*

1.00

2.31

1.58

2.28

1.89

Group Mean 2.98 3.08 2.91 2.99 3.02 3.08 2.99 2.91 3.02 a

 Standard deviation

*

, **, *** Mean difference is significant at = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 101

Appendix I. Weighted Means by Demographic

Breakdowns Grouped by Strategic Level

Objectives

Access (see table I1).

Preservation/Conservation (see table I2).

Economic Development (see table I3).

Education (see table I4).

Natural Resource Management (see table I5).

Table I1. Access. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.41

1.49a

2.48

1.11

2.28

1.55

2.43

0.98

2.57

1.97

2.48

1.11

2.43

0.98

2.28

1.55

2.57**

1.97

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

2.82

1.47

3.06

1.11

2.79*

1.60

2.92

0.98

2.76

1.75

3.06

1.11

2.92

0.98

2.79

1.60

2.76

1.75

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.75

1.33

3.56

0.92

3.80*

1.43

3.27

0.89

3.82**

1.67

3.56

0.92

3.27*

0.89

3.80

1.43

3.82

1.67

4. Designate trails for specific

uses

3.59

1.43

3.72

0.98

3.65

1.63

3.83

1.01

3.36*

1.63

3.72

0.98

3.83

1.01

3.65

1.63

3.36*

1.63

5. Develop more paved roads 2.62

1.49

2.59

1.14

2.57

1.64

2.45

1.05

2.76

1.80

2.59

1.14

2.45

1.05

2.57

1.64

2.76

1.80

6. Designate more wilderness

to stop development &

motorized access

3.84

1.41

3.70

1.05

3.90

1.51

3.28

1.14

3.89**

1.66

3.70

1.05

3.28**

1.14

3.90

1.51

3.89

1.66

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.52

1.50

2.67

1.12

2.50

1.61

2.70

1.17

2.47

1.76

2.67

1.12

2.70

1.17

2.50

1.61

2.47

1.76

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

2.98

1.51

2.95

1.16

2.86

1.71

2.84

1.04

3.22

1.72

2.95

1.16

2.84

1.04

2.86

1.71

3.22**

1.72

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.71

1.37

3.45

1.07

3.75**

1.49

3.19

0.96

3.82**

1.59

3.45

1.07

3.19

0.96

3.75

1.49

3.82

1.59

4. Designate trails for specific

uses

3.94

1.25

4.11

0.93

3.92

1.34

4.00

0.92

3.88

1.53

4.11

0.93

4.00

0.92

3.92

1.34

3.88

1.53

5. Develop more paved roads 2.70

1.57

2.65

1.05

2.53

1.67

2.24

0.95

3.02**

2.05

2.65

1.05

2.24**

0.95

2.53

1.67

3.02***

2.05

continued on next page
102 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table I2. Preservation/conservation. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect

watersheds

4.73

0.76a

4.68

0.58

4.75

0.81

4.57

0.72

4.75

0.86

4.68

0.58

4.57

0.72

4.75

0.81

4.75

0.86

8. Preserve natural

resources through

policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.22

1.23

3.99

1.04

4.29**

1.26

3.83

1.05

4.29**

1.46

3.99

1.04

3.83

1.05

4.29

1.26

4.29

1.46

9. Protecting ecosystems

and wildlife habitat

4.58

0.92

4.49

0.76

4.61

0.98

4.23

0.82

4.62***

1.02

4.49

0.76

4.23**

0.82

4.61

0.98

4.62

1.02

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

4.15

1.28

3.96

1.01

4.25**

1.31

4.21

0.77

4.08

1.65

3.96

1.01

4.21

0.77

4.25

1.31

4.08*

1.65

11. Preserve local cultural

uses

3.82

1.38

3.78

0.97

3.85

1.51

3.69

1.06

3.82

1.68

3.78

0.97

3.69

1.06

3.85

1.51

3.82

1.68

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect

watersheds

4.61

0.83

4.57

0.69

4.67

0.84

4.36

0.72

4.57*

0.99

4.57

0.69

4.36*

0.72

4.67

0.84

4.57

0.99

continued on next page

Table I1. Continued.

6. Designate more wilderness

to stop development &

motorized access

3.66

1.46

3.58

1.06

3.84*

1.54

3.09

1.22

3.54*

1.75

3.58

1.06

3.09**

1.22

3.84

1.54

3.54**

1.75

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

1. Expand off-highway

motorized access

2.97

1.45

3.06

1.03

2.95

1.61

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.82

3.06

1.03

2.97

1.00

2.95

1.61

2.95

1.82

2. Trails for motorized

vehicles

3.25

1.38

3.24

0.94

3.24

1.51

3.24

0.96

3.29

1.71

3.24

0.94

3.24

0.96

3.24

1.51

3.29

1.71

3. Trails for non-motorized

recreation

3.59

1.27

3.54

0.93

3.53

1.36

3.34

1.09

3.74*

1.57

3.54

0.93

3.34

1.09

3.53

1.36

3.74

1.57

4. Designate trails for specific

uses

3.61

1.33

3.82

0.90

3.54*

1.47

3.56

0.90

3.62

1.72

3.82

0.90

3.56

0.90

3.54

1.47

3.62

1.72

5. Develop more paved roads 3.19

1.43

3.21

1.02

3.35

1.54

2.89

0.91

3.01

1.80

3.21

1.02

2.89*

0.91

3.35

1.54

3.01**

1.80

6. Designate more wilderness

to stop development &

motorized access

3.45

1.34

3.34

1.02

3.35

1.46

3.24

0.95

3.65*

1.59

3.34

1.02

3.24

0.95

3.35

1.46

3.65**

1.59

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 103

Table I3. Economic development. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation

and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

12. Provide natural

resources to dependent

communities

3.60

1.39a

3.65

1.03

3.66

1.53

3.80

0.89

3.44

1.70

3.65

1.03

3.80

0.89

3.66

1.53

3.44*

1.70

13. Restrict development

of minerals

3.96

1.42

3.88

1.07

4.10*

1.40

3.76

1.05

3.82

1.95

3.88

1.07

3.76

1.05

4.10

1.40

3.82**

1.95

14. Restrict timber harvest

and grazing

3.99

1.27

3.92

0.98

4.09

1.31

3.56

1.05

3.95*

1.58

3.92

0.98

3.56*

1.05

4.09

1.31

3.95

1.58

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

2.89

1.55

2.90

1.14

2.82

1.69

3.08

1.06

2.96

1.91

2.90

1.14

3.08

1.06

2.82

1.69

2.96

1.91

16. Develop a national

policy for natural

resource development

4.26

1.23

4.05

0.97

4.32**

1.31

3.71

0.98

4.31***

1.40

4.05

0.97

3.71*

0.98

4.32

1.31

4.31

1.40

continued on next page

Table I2. Continued.

8. Preserve natural

resources through

policies such as no

timber, no mining

4.21

1.27

4.05

1.01

4.29

1.30

3.83

1.06

4.22*

1.57

4.05

1.01

3.83

1.06

4.29

1.30

4.22

1.57

9. Protecting ecosystems

and wildlife habitat

4.53

0.98

4.41

0.78

4.55

1.08

4.40

0.69

4.56

1.14

4.41

0.78

4.40

0.69

4.55

1.08

4.56

1.14

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

4.22

1.14

4.22

0.86

4.25

1.23

3.83

0.97

4.24**

1.33

4.22

0.86

3.83***

0.97

4.25

1.23

4.24

1.33

11. Preserve local cultural

uses

3.75

1.36

3.80

1.03

3.81

1.39

3.21

1.05

3.73**

1.78

3.80

1.03

3.21***

1.05

3.81

1.39

3.73

1.78

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

7. Conserve and protect

watersheds

3.91

1.17

3.81

0.93

3.91

1.23

3.71

0.91

4.00*

1.43

3.81

0.93

3.71

0.91

3.91

1.23

4.00

1.43

8. Preserve natural

resources through

policies such as no

timber, no mining

3.65

1.31

3.61

1.03

3.67

1.38

3.32

0.90

3.69

1.63

3.61

1.03

3.32

0.90

3.67

1.38

3.69

1.63

9. Protecting ecosystems

and wildlife habitat

3.90

1.16

4.06

0.80

3.89

1.28

3.97

0.83

3.82

1.42

4.06

0.80

3.97

0.83

3.89

1.28

3.82

1.42

10. Preserve wilderness

experience

3.88

1.10

3.92

0.80

3.87

1.18

3.83

0.83

3.90

1.36

3.92

0.80

3.83

0.83

3.87

1.18

3.90

1.36

11. Preserve local cultural

uses

3.39

1.37

3.51

0.97

3.24*

1.63

3.55

0.95

3.56

1.45

3.51

0.97

3.55

0.95

3.24

1.63

3.56*

1.45

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
104 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table I3. Continued.

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.04

1.45

3.02

1.00

2.87

1.49

3.18

1.03

3.31

1.95

3.02

1.00

3.18

1.03

2.87

1.49

3.31***

1.95

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

12. Provide natural

resources to dependent

communities

3.29

1.39

3.26

1.02

3.38

1.54

3.43

0.93

3.13

1.64

3.26

1.02

3.43

0.93

3.38

1.54

3.13*

1.64

13. Restrict development

of minerals

3.95

1.43

3.80

1.11

4.06*

1.48

3.55

0.95

3.91

1.80

3.80

1.11

3.55

0.95

4.06

1.48

3.91

1.80

14. Restrict timber harvest

and grazing

3.94

1.34

3.71

1.13

4.02**

1.39

3.09

1.23

4.07***

1.47

3.71

1.13

3.09***

1.23

4.02

1.39

4.07

1.47

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

2.90

1.59

2.94

1.17

2.73

1.70

2.94

1.09

3.15

2.02

2.94

1.17

2.94

1.09

2.73

1.70

3.15***

2.02

16. Develop a national

policy for natural

resource development

4.21

1.19

4.08

1.05

4.27*

1.21

4.02

0.81

4.20

1.46

4.08

1.05

4.02

0.81

4.27

1.21

4.20

1.46

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.25

1.53

3.20

1.05

3.15

1.63

2.87

1.00

3.48**

1.97

3.20

1.05

2.87*

1.00

3.15

1.63

3.48**

1.97

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

12. Provide natural

resources to dependent

communities

3.45

1.30

3.46

0.93

3.57

1.41

3.04

0.98

3.35

1.55

3.46

0.93

3.04**

0.98

3.57

1.41

3.35*

1.55

13. Restrict development

of minerals

3.30

1.50

3.57

1.04

3.31*

1.61

3.13

0.96

3.21

1.98

3.57

1.04

3.13**

0.96

3.31

1.61

3.21

1.98

14. Restrict timber harvest

and grazing

3.50

1.36

3.34

1.04

3.55

1.46

2.96

1.01

3.61**

1.66

3.34

1.04

2.96*

1.01

3.55

1.46

3.61

1.66

15. Make the permitting

process easier for

established uses

3.05

1.43

3.16

1.09

3.05

1.55

3.24

0.97

2.95

1.84

3.16

1.09

3.24

0.97

3.05

1.55

2.95

1.84

16. Develop a national

policy for natural

resource development

3.51

1.26

3.61

0.91

3.53

1.41

3.17

0.92

3.50

1.51

3.61

0.91

3.17**

0.92

3.53

1.41

3.50

1.51

17. Expand commercial

recreation

3.45

1.24

3.31

0.99

3.42

1.35

3.34

0.82

3.58

1.49

3.31

0.99

3.34

0.82

3.42

1.35

3.58

1.49

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 105

Table I4. Education. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on Recreation and the

Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

land (tree planting, etc.)

4.60

0.86a

4.47

0.72

4.63*

0.88

4.42

0.77

4.65

0.98

4.47

0.72

4.42

0.77

4.63

0.88

4.65

0.98

19. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.18

1.13

4.04

0.87

4.09

1.31

4.32

0.66

4.34

1.24

4.04

0.87

4.32*

0.66

4.09

1.31

4.34**

1.24

20. Inform the public about

recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.53

0.93

4.47

0.77

4.58

0.97

4.35

0.83

4.51

1.08

4.47

0.77

4.35

0.83

4.58

0.97

4.51

1.08

21. Inform the public on

potential environmental

impacts of uses

4.39

1.02

4.29

0.82

4.54***

0.94

3.86

0.95

4.31**

1.37

4.29

0.82

3.86***

0.95

4.54

0.94

4.31***

1.37

22. Inform the public on

economic value from

developing natural

resources

4.02

1.30

3.93

1.03

4.10

1.36

3.90

1.06

3.95

1.55

3.93

1.03

3.90

1.06

4.10

1.36

3.95

1.55

23. Encourage

collaboration between

groups to share

information

4.15

1.20

4.23

0.80

4.23

1.23

3.93

0.85

4.03

1.64

4.23

0.80

3.93*

0.85

4.23

1.23

4.03*

1.64

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

land (tree planting, etc.)

4.46

1.03

4.48

0.77

4.50

1.02

4.20

0.84

4.42

1.38

4.48

0.77

4.20*

0.84

4.50

1.02

4.42

1.38

19. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

4.22

1.09

4.18

0.85

4.20

1.18

4.18

0.82

4.28

1.31

4.18

0.85

4.18

0.82

4.20

1.18

4.28

1.31

20. Inform the public about

recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

4.50

0.93

4.50

0.71

4.55

1.00

4.42

0.72

4.45

1.12

4.50

0.71

4.42

0.72

4.55

1.00

4.45

1.12

21. Inform the public on

potential environmental

impacts of uses

4.48

1.00

4.32

0.78

4.48

1.10

4.46

0.64

4.54

1.18

4.32

0.78

4.46

0.64

4.48

1.10

4.54

1.18

22. Inform the public on

economic value from

developing natural

resources

4.08

1.17

4.20

0.85

4.11

1.28

3.93

0.94

3.99

1.39

4.20

0.85

3.93*

0.94

4.11

1.28

3.99

1.39

23. Encourage

collaboration between

grou s to share

4.15

1.17

4.21

0.82

4.12

1.30

4.07

0.84

4.19

1.42

4.21

0.82

4.07

0.84

4.12

1.30

4.19

1.42

continued on next page

p
106 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table I5. Natural resource management. Survey items are from the VOBA module of the National Survey on

Recreation and the Environment.

Objectives

for the management of forests and grasslands

(1=not at all important, 5=very important)

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

Nonmetro MetroNonmetro Metro East West East West

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.90

1.20a

3.83

0.94

3.96

1.23

3.66

0.79

3.89

1.56

3.83

0.94

3.66

0.79

3.96

1.23

3.89

1.56

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.07

1.18

4.00

0.93

4.16

1.20

4.11

0.87

3.95

1.48

4.00

0.93

4.11

0.87

4.16

1.20

3.95*

1.48

26. Make management decisions at

the local level (rather than

national)

3.93

1.22

4.07

0.85

3.84*

1.40

3.91

0.84

3.99

1.40

4.07

0.85

3.91

0.84

3.84

1.40

3.99

1.40

27. Increase total number of acres in

the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.81

1.42

3.64

0.97

3.97**

1.49

3.19

1.07

3.75*

1.82

3.64

0.97

3.19**

1.07

3.97

1.49

3.75*

1.82

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and Grasslands

3.66

1.36

3.69

0.99

3.65

1.51

3.67

1.22

3.66

1.52

3.69

0.99

3.67

1.22

3.65

1.51

3.66

1.52

continued on next page

Table I4. Continued.

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

Survey item number and East West Non-metro Metro

statement

Full

sample Non-metro Metro Non-metro Metro East West East West

18. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

land (tree planting, etc.)

3.85

1.25

3.76

0.97

3.91

1.26

3.78

0.91

3.81

1.67

3.76

0.97

3.78

0.91

3.91

1.26

3.81

1.67

19. Develop volunteer

programs to improve

facilities (trails, etc.)

3.79

1.21

3.93

0.86

3.83

1.28

3.70

0.96

3.68

1.53

3.93

0.86

3.70

0.96

3.83

1.28

3.68

1.53

20. Inform the public about

recreation concerns

(safety, trail etiquette,

etc.)

3.89

1.31

4.01

0.95

3.92

1.36

3.75

0.76

3.84

1.73

4.01

0.95

3.75*

0.76

3.92

1.36

3.84

1.73

21. Inform the public on

potential environmental

impacts of uses

3.50

1.33

3.61

0.97

3.48

1.39

3.40

0.90

3.50

1.77

3.61

0.97

3.40

0.90

3.48

1.39

3.50

1.77

22. Inform the public on

economic value from

developing natural

resources

3.40

1.38

3.38

1.00

3.38

1.47

3.42

1.07

3.43

1.72

3.38

1.00

3.42

1.07

3.38

1.47

3.43

1.72

23. Encourage

collaboration between

groups to share

information

3.72

1.22

3.67

0.90

3.65

1.40

3.76

0.80

3.83

1.46

3.67

0.90

3.76

0.80

3.65

1.40

3.83

1.46

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 107

Table I5. Continued.

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.21

3.96

0.97

3.98

1.30

3.65

0.88

4.12*

1.50

3.96

0.97

3.65*

0.88

3.98

1.30

4.12

1.50

30. Trade public lands for private to

eliminate inholdings, acquire

unique lands

3.05

1.48

3.07

1.05

2.99

1.57

2.96

1.04

3.15

1.90

3.07

1.05

2.96

1.04

2.99

1.57

3.15

1.90

Beliefs about the role of the USDA Forest Service

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

Nonmetro MetroNonmetro Metro East West East West

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.84

1.25

4.04

0.85

3.74*

1.41

3.98

0.91

3.92

1.44

4.04

0.85

3.98

0.91

3.74

1.41

3.92

1.44

25. Allow for diverse uses 4.02

1.14

4.03

0.90

4.03

1.25

4.17

0.74

3.96

1.37

4.03

0.90

4.17

0.74

4.03

1.25

3.96

1.37

26. Make management decisions at

the local level (rather than

national)

3.88

1.34

4.04

0.94

3.81*

1.44

4.41

0.80

3.83**

1.69

4.04

0.94

4.41**

0.80

3.81

1.44

3.83

1.69

27. Increase total number of acres in

the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.95

1.47

3.81

1.02

3.90

1.54

3.32

1.05

4.15***

1.85

3.81

1.02

3.32**

1.05

3.90

1.54

4.15*

1.85

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and Grasslands

3.69

1.43

3.64

0.95

3.81

1.49

3.51

0.89

3.61

1.93

3.64

0.95

3.51

0.89

3.81

1.49

3.61

1.93

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and Grasslands

4.01

1.26

4.08

0.91

4.09

1.31

4.03

0.83

3.87

1.68

4.08

0.91

4.03

0.83

4.09

1.31

3.87*

1.68

30. Trade public lands for private to

eliminate inholdings, acquire

unique lands

3.22

1.49

3.18

1.17

3.22

1.69

2.87

0.88

3.27

1.72

3.18

1.17

2.87

0.88

3.22

1.69

3.27

1.72

Attitudes

about the performance of the Forest Service

(1=very unfavorable, 5=very favorable)

East West Non-metro Metro

Survey item number and statement

Full

sample

Nonmetro MetroNonmetro Metro East West East West

24. Using public advisory

committees to advise on

management issues

3.36

1.26

3.39

0.93

3.35

1.48

3.34

0.82

3.35

1.42

3.39

0.93

3.34

0.82

3.35

1.48

3.35

1.42

25. Allow for diverse uses 3.73

1.18

3.72

0.88

3.71

1.15

3.76

0.82

3.76

1.68

3.72

0.88

3.76

0.82

3.71

1.15

3.76

1.68

26. Make management decisions at

the local level (rather than

national)

3.49

1.32

3.63

0.98

3.42

1.39

3.56

0.94

3.52

1.68

3.63

0.98

3.56

0.94

3.42

1.39

3.52

1.68

27. Increase total number of acres in

the National Forest and

Grassland system

3.52

1.45

3.51

0.91

3.42

1.42

3.68

0.92

3.62

2.11

3.51

0.91

3.68

0.92

3.42

1.42

3.62

2.11

continued on next page
108 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Table I5. Continued.

28. Collect an entry fee to support

National Forests and Grasslands

3.61

1.36

3.73

0.89

3.56

1.55

3.40

1.03

3.66

1.63

3.73

0.89

3.40*

1.03

3.56

1.55

3.66

1.63

29. Increasing law enforcement on

National Forests and Grasslands

3.85

1.27

3.85

0.95

3.89

1.37

3.48

0.98

3.85

1.61

3.85

0.95

3.48*

0.98

3.89

1.37

3.85

1.61

30. Trade public lands for private to

eliminate inholdings, acquire

unique lands

3.22

1.27

3.27

1.08

3.24

1.38

2.96

0.95

3.21

1.37

3.27

1.08

2.96

0.95

3.24

1.38

3.21

1.37

a

 Standard deviation

*, **, *** Mean difference is significant at  = 0.05, 0.01, 0.001
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 109

Appendix J. Glossary of Terms

Attitudes The degree to which a respondent feels the USDA Forest Service

is fulfilling his or her objectives.

Beliefs The degree to which a respondent agrees that a particular item is an

appropriate role for the USDA Forest Service.

Biocentric Having life as its center or main principle. A biocentric perspective

could include any or all of the following ideas: persons and nonpersons are all members of earth’s community, earth’s ecosystem

is an interrelated totality, each organism is pursuing its own good

and goals, and persons are not inherently superior to other components of ecosystems.

Conservation Planned management of a natural resource to prevent exploitation,

destruction, or neglect.

Eastern region The following states are included in the region called “East” in this

report: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington DC, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Familiarity questions The following questions (included in the NSRE) were designed to

gauge a respondent’s familiarity with the USDA Forest Service.

Each has a “True/False” format. The correct answer follows each

question.

1. The Forest Service regulates hunting and fishing seasons. (False)

2. The Forest Service has Smokey Bear as its mascot. (True)

3. The Forest Service enforces the Endangered Species Act. (False)

4. The Forest Service manages national forests for recreation, timber, and water. (True)

5. The Forest Service provides visitor information and protects

wildlife in National Parks. (False)

High familiarity A respondent is said to possess a high degree of familiarity with

the USDA Forest Service if he/she correctly answers 3 or more of

the familiarity questions in the NSRE.

Instrumental Serving as a means, useful. Hence, instrumental values are values

based on something’s usefulness.
110 USDA Forest Service RMRS GTR-95. 2002

Low familiarity A respondent is said to possess a low degree of familiarity with the

USDA Forest Service if he/she correctly answers fewer than 3 of

the familiarity questions in the NSRE.

Metropolitan county Any county considered a “central county” in a metropolitan statistical area, as defined by United States Bureau of the Census. These

counties include a central city or at least 50% of the population of a

central city. (A central city is a city or urbanized area of 50,000 or

more.) A list of those counties that meet this criteria (as of Dec. 7

1999) was obtained from the Census Bureau website and used for

all analyses in this report.

Module A separate unit or section within the NSRE.

Non-metropolitan Any county which is not included in the Census Bureau’s list of

county metropolitan counties is a non-metropolitan county.

NSRE The National Survey on Recreation and the Environment

Objectives Something toward which effort is directed; an aim or end of action.

In the case of the VOBA, these are respondents’ goals for public

lands, actions, or states that they find desirable.

Preservation To keep up and reserve for special use. In the case of natural resources, preservation would preclude any consumptive use.

Pre-test As part of the development of a questionnaire, a draft version is

presented to a sample of respondents, resembling the respondents

who will complete the final version, in order to refine and improve

the questionnaire.

Public Lands Values A scale composed of 25 items concerning environmental and resource issues for public lands.

Reverse score In order to calculate a group mean for two or more scale items which

have the opposite direction, it is necessary to make the endpoints of

the scale have the same meaning. To illustrate this we will use an

example. Suppose we want to examine the overall preference for

sweets as indicated by the preference for ice cream and pie. We

have two scale items. For each a 1 indicates “strongly disagree” and

a 5 indicates “strongly agree.” In order to avoid the appearance of

bias toward or against sweets, the two items move in opposite directions. The two items are: “I like ice cream” and “I don’t like

pie.” Clearly a person who likes all sweets will answer 5 to the first

item and 1 to the second. Conversely, someone who does not like

any sweets will answer 1 to the first and 5 to the second. If these

items are grouped, these two (clearly different) respondents will

have the same mean for the group (3). This would give researchers

very little (if any) information. In order to calculate a meaningful

mean, we choose one of the items, in this example we’ll choose the

second, and reverse the scoring. So, an answer of 5 to “I don’t like

pie” would become a 1 (and we can reword the item as “I like pie”).

An answer of 4 becomes 2, 3 remains the same, 2 becomes 4 and 5
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-95. 2002 111

becomes 1. This in effect creates a new item that corresponds in

direction to “I like ice cream.” Respondent one (the sweet tooth)

will have a mean for the two items of 5 and respondent two’s mean

becomes 1. Now we have an indication of each respondent’s preference for sweets. We can also calculate the mean for the whole sample

for the group of items and gain information about the sample’s overall

preference for sweets. A similar rescoring was done for certain items

in the VOBA in order to more accurately characterize overall preferences for item groups.

Scale A survey type which employs a set a statements to which a respondent provides a rating indicating the strength of his/her agreement

or disagreement along a continuum. For example, a 1 might indicate strong disagreement, a 5 might indicate strong agreement, and

the numbers in between might indicate less extreme preferences.

Scale item One statement of many comprising a scale.

Socially Responsible A dimension of the Public Lands Values scale having to do with the

Individual Values actions of the individual related to public lands.

Socially Responsible A dimension of the Public Lands Values scale having to do with the

Management Values actions of public land management agencies related to public lands.

Standard deviation The square root of the average of the squares of the deviations from

the mean.

VOBA A survey of the American public’s Values, Objectives, Beliefs, and

Attitudes regarding forests and grasslands.

Weighted mean An average of the values of a set of items to each of which is accorded a weight indicative of its frequency or relative importance.

Western region The following states are included in the region called “West” in this

report: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,

Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and

Wyoming.
The Authors

Deborah J. Shields is Principal Mineral Economist, USDA Forest Service Research,

Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO [Tel (970) 295-5975; email

dshields@fs.fed.us]; Ingrid M. Mar tin is Associate Professor, Department of Marketing,

California State University, Long Beach, CA; Wade E. Mar tin is Associate Professor,

Department of Economics, California State University, Long Beach, CA; Michelle A.

Haefele is Post Doctoral Research Associate, Department of Economics, Colorado State

University, Fort Collins, CO.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs

and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability,

political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family staus. (Not all prohibited bases

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for

communcation of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should

contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202)720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room

326 W, Whitten Building 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-

9410 or call (202)720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider

and employer.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

FOREST SERVICE

ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT RMRS-GTR-95

SEPTEMBER 2002