Archive

Archive for the ‘Roving Interpretation’ Category

To Rove or Not To Rove?

June 30th, 2009 Doug Knapp 4 comments

5 Dog sled Web

A park that does not have an aggressive roving strategy is missing important visitor connections and diminishing the power of the interpreter. ALL of the parks that have been studied by the author underutilized this technique. “Hot spots” in parks that have a high flow of visitation seemed to rarely have an interpreter present to interface with their constituents. There are many reasons why including a lack of budget or that the park or nature center places more effort / resources toward traditional techniques. It is the latter that seems a bit perplexing. Take the following scene I came upon a few years ago:

During a fall afternoon in Great Smoky Mountain National Park, a table was set up in front of the Cades Cove Visitor Center. It held a variety of historical artifacts from the Appalachia era circa early 1800’s. Among the items were toys of the time period that were particularly being scrutinized by children, who in turn, drew the adults closer to the table. A very personable interpreter supervised the items and was offering tidbits of information – excellent one on one interpretation complete with hands-on props. After an hour of displaying the props and answering questions from many visitors, the interpreter closed up to prepare and conduct a formal program tour of the historic area adjacent to the visitor center. The program was listed in the Smokies Newsletter, advertised at the visitor center and announced through a posted sign at the head of the trail.

TWO people participated in the walk!

The irony of this scenario is obvious. One hour of artifacts on a table attracted tens if not hundreds of one on one moments while a well prepared and marketed walk resulted in a personal tour of a couple from the neighboring state of Kentucky. While the table of touchables is common in nature centers, it is less frequent out in the resource (i.e. along a trail or near a historic building). However, the success described above has not been lost by many resource sites – in particular zoos and aquariums – who are using organized one on one approaches more often and decreasing their schedule of formal programs.

The power of the flesh and blood interpreter cannot be ignored. Hence, having an interpreter milling around a popular overlook or walking a highly used path will offer more direct contact with the visitor, increase the odds of a quality experience for the visitor and add viability for the use of interpretation at that resource site. More importantly, in administrative terms, it would make more economic sense for those hours to be amongst the people rather than spent in the back of a visitor center to prepare for a program.

Categories: Roving Interpretation Tags: