• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us|
• Jobs

Visitor Survey of the Lower Waitaki Valley

1 Introduction

2 Method

3 The Traveller Survey

4 The Holiday Visitor Survey

Conclusions

Reference

Appendix 1: Visitor Survey Forms

4 The Holiday Visitor Survey

All of the 124 respondents contacted in this survey declared themselves to be on holidays of varying duration.

Although many were first time holidaymakers, many had visited the area, and often the same location, many times over long periods; the details are set out in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: "How long have you been coming on holiday to this area?"

A third of the sample were on their first visit, but a full quarter were at the other extreme, having visited the area regularly, as it transpired, over more than 30 years, with the longest recorded response being for 48 years.

The reasons for going to that location, or for returning to go there, were very much to do with the river, especially, as might be expected at the fishing hut settlements, but various environmental and social qualities were important too. Results are set out in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: What are your main reasons for choosing to holiday on the lower Waitaki?"

A number of other reasons, such as the opportunity for painting or for fruit picking, were mentioned by individual respondents. Fishing is by far the most important reason, especially for the Kurow motor camp segment and for the fishing huts at the river mouth. Residents of the Dansey's Pass motor camp tended to emphasise environmental and social values much more. These included the peacefulness of the area, the family environment and so on. Thus, while the nature of the river as an important fishery is of specific and place sensitive importance, many of the attributes of the area are eminently replicable.

Respondents were also asked to list the main leisure activities that they undertook while on holiday; given that particular activities were cited as the main motive for holidaymaking in the lower Waitaki valley, it is not surprising that Table 4.3 should be similar to the previous one, Table 4.2.

Table 4.3: What are your main leisure activities while on holiday?"

Since more than one activity could be listed, results add up to more than 100 percent. Clearly, water-based activities are central to the holiday experience on the lower Waitaki. The next question asked whether any of them were carried out on the lower Waitaki and 46 percent of the sample answered that they were. The specific activities were principally fishing and boating, with minor mentions of swimming and picnicking. The stretches of river that were used were focused on the Kurow area, with a secondary focus at the river mouth. Table 4.4 sets these out, with the percentages referring to the proportion of those who specified an area.

Table 4.4: "Which parts of the Waitaki River do you mainly visit for these activities?"

Respondents were then asked if they used any other parts of the Waitaki and lakes system for those or similar activities. The overwhelming majority nominated the lakes in general or occasionally individually, while a small number listed the Ahuriri, Maerewhenua and Hakataramea streams. The extent to which the Waitaki River was used, compared with other places, is set out in Table 4.5. The highest proportion was 95 percent and the lowest 5 percent.

Table 4.5: "What proportion of your time is spent on the Waitaki River itself?"

It can be seen that there is a range of proportions, but some 60 percent use the Waitaki River half of the time or more, but that relatively few use it either exclusively or not at all.

Respondents were asked if there were other activities that took them out of the lower Waitaki proper, but these were relatively few. A small minority listed picnics, fruit picking, visiting geological sites (such as the Clay Cliffs at Omarama) and shopping in Oamaru. Because of the limited number and general nature of the activities listed, a range of other locations from around the country were listed. Apart from a minor focus on the area around Queenstown and Wanaka, no particular pattern was observable and alternative locations seem primarily related to place of normal residence. When asked to estimate how much of their total holiday time would be spent in the lower Waitaki itself, many respondents felt unsure and suggested that 'about half' was probably their best estimate. In total, 40 percent nominated three-quarters or more, a similar proportion cited a half and the remainder ranged about 30 percent. The lowest figure was a single case of 10 percent, but 15 percent said that all of their time would be spent there.

Similar questions to those asked of travellers through the area were asked of the holidaymaking population, with reference to scenic qualities. Personal evaluations of the scenic quality of the lower Waitaki Valley are set out in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6: "How do you personally rate the scenery of the lower Waitaki valley?"

As with the travelling sample, the single largest response was to describe the scenery as 'picturesque', although this was effectively shared by a designation of 'impressive', with the two values being well within the margin of error. Similarly, almost a quarter saw the scenery as being 'exceptional', while few saw it as 'moderate' and none as 'dull'. When the two samples are compared, there is a tendency for the resident population to offer slightly higher evaluations than the travellers, although the two are not strikingly different.

In a comparison with other scenery that the respondent had experienced, ratings were higher than for the travelling sample to a greater extent than in the previous table. Results for the resident sample are set out below.

Table 4.7: "How does the lower Waitaki valley compare with other scenery that you have seen so far?"

Clearly, with three times as many offering 'among the very best' as their evaluation, perceptions are much more favourable; conversely, fewer rated the comparison as 'about average'. The high degree of awareness of river development issues among resident holiday makers may partially account for this difference through consciously strategic evaluation, but the extent, if any, is impossible to calculate.

The difference between the two samples is greatest for the next question, which asks about the significance of the river itself as a landscape component. Since a high proportion of this sample are overtly river users, it is natural that they should have a far clearer and more intimate view of the exact character of the river itself, to a degree that is quite impossible for the traveller restricted to the main highways. The evaluations recorded are set out in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8: "Scenically, how important is the Waitaki River itself as a feature of the valley?"

Nearly four times as many saw the river as the 'most outstanding feature'; at nearly 60 percent, this is by far the dominant response, while a further 13 percent who said that it was a 'fairly important feature' means that, for this sample, the river has critical significance. These sentiments are replicated in the final question in this section, which asks what particular features make the lower Waitaki valley scenically attractive, with the bulk of responses concerned with attributes of the river. Responses are recorded in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9: "What do you think are the particular features that make the lower Waitaki scenically attractive, if you think that it is?"

As noted above, the river is well known to and much used by, this sample, so it is not surprising that its size and character should dominate this table. Again, the reference to the lakes shows that the question may not have been answered accurately by some respondents.

The final question asked for the respondents' normal place of residence. By contrast with the travelling sample, the people questioned are primarily New Zealanders and mostly from the South Island.

Table 4.10: "Where is your usual home?"

Overall, only 8 percent were from overseas, compared with 68 percent for travellers. Indeed, at least two respondents were from a bed and breakfast establishment and could themselves reasonably be considered as travellers, rather than as holidaymakers. Similarly, the proportion of Canterbury residents is much higher than for the other sample and the Otago and Southland group correspondingly much less.