Environmental consciousness of RV visitors to Rocky Mountain National Parks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RV travel is a growing market but remains largely under-studied. More and more visitors to National Parks choose to travel in an RV. The goal of the study presented in this paper was to investigate the environmental consciousness of RV visitors to National Parks and determine their awareness of the negative environmental impacts of RV traveling, as well as the actions they take to mitigate these impacts. A paper-based intercept survey of RV travelers was conducted in the summer of 2007 at three major campgrounds in the Mountain Parks: Whistlers (Jasper), Tunnel Mountain (Banff) and Lake Louise. The results reveal that less than half of the RV visitors are aware of their ecological footprint while traveling in an RV, and an even smaller number takes measures to reduce their ecological footprint while traveling in an RV. However, the study results also show that some RVers are more environmentally conscious than others. The paper concludes that with the growing number of RV travelers, National Parks are a perfect place to educate the visitors and raise the environmental awareness. These issues are further discussed in relation to the Parks Canada mandate.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".