Data Interpretation
After analysing my graphs I have noticed that tourism has had a positive impact on Lyndhurst socially and economically, however environmentally the impacts are more on the negative side. 56.6% of all the people I asked had positive views on the impacts on tourism on the New Forest. 26.6% of the people didn’t know and couldn’t decide if it was more positive or negative. 16.6% of the people had negative views on tourism in the New Forest. When I did the questionnaire I had a total of 16 residents and 14 tourists so the results that I received were fairly even with the numbers.
I noticed that the environmental impacts of tourism in Lyndhurst are negative. I found this out because after looking at my EQS (Environmental Quality Survey) graphs I noticed that there are some negative impacts, like some areas having bad air quality and noise levels in certain areas being very high. Since Lyndhurst is a honeypot site, a lot of cars were passing through, which can cause some levels of pollution. Furthermore the majority of the transport that people used was cars and buses. This can fill up the roads and make it harder for people to use transport. Also because there are so many tourists it can get quite crowded which then makes it hard to move around. When I was in Lyndhurst I found that for every resident there was also a tourist. Also the litter count in Lyndhurst is quite high, according to my results on the EQS. On the high streets of Lyndhurst the litter count was much higher than the side streets. The litter count was probably caused by the tourists that visit Lyndhurst. There were many food wrappers and drink bottles and cans.
Also, tourism has had social impacts on Lyndhurst and the New Forest. For example some of the people that I interviewed using my public questionnaire, had travelled to Lyndhurst from very far places. Some people that were in