Understanding Summer Visitors and Their Experiences at the Whistler Mountain Ski Area, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The popularity of operating chairlifts at alpine ski areas in the summer to accommodate activities such as hiking and mountain biking is growing, especially in North America. Research has been conducted on environmental impacts of summer use at ski areas, but the social aspects have received little empirical attention. This paper describes summer visitors' (1) demographics; (2) activities and other trip characteristics; (3) motivations; and (4) experiences and satisfaction with lift ticket fees, management strategies, conflicting activities, and other on-site conditions. Data were obtained from visitor surveys (n = 548) conducted from July to September 2000 at 5 separate sites at the Whistler Mountain ski area in Canada. Hikers, sightseers, and mountain bikers were the main activity groups. Overall satisfaction was high, but visitors were not satisfied with every aspect of their experience. Many were displeased with crowding, environmental impacts, lift ticket fees, lack of educational/interpretive information provided, and overflights by helicopter tours. Responses, however, differed among the sites, suggesting the need for managing each site separately. Explanations for these findings and implications for managers and researchers are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".