Based on what we discussed in Part I and Part II, multiple factors impact crowd control and visitor flow in interpretive facilities. The nature of the resource (what you are interpreting) and venue (where the resource is located) are of critical importance, as are the techniques for controlling visitor flow – pacing (planned free flow), pulsing (controlled containment and release of defined groups), and characteristics of the path (width, terrain, etc.) that one uses to navigate during their visit.
So what’s the takeaway and how is visitor experience ultimately affected?
Let’s begin with the trends related to the types of resources and venues. In either case, a single focus requires pulsing to regulate visitor flow, whereas, if they are multi-focused, they may rely on pacing. And, regardless of the strategy employed, the characteristics of path must be carefully considered.
A real world example of how implementing these various strategies can greatly enhance the visitor experience can be found at the David Wills House in Gettysburg. The Wills House is where Abraham Lincoln slept and, as rumor has it, finalized the Gettysburg Address prior to his speech on November 19, 1863. For years the Lincoln Bedroom was a shrine, but the rest of the house had nothing to do with the resource. The torturous path to the bedroom consisted of a single side door entry up a steep stair to the second floor, through a gift shop to the bedroom, turn around and exit in the same manner. The Lincoln Bedroom was an excellent example of a single focus resource within a single focus venue (the Wills House) where little effort was made to control crowding and the characteristics of the path were horrendous.
