PROFILE OF VISITORS TO PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA
Center for Tourism Research and Development
Department of Tourism, Recreation & Sport Management
University of Florida
PO Box 118208
Gainesville, FL 32611-8208
(352) 392-3992 (phone)
(352) 392-7588 (fax)
Pasco County Board of County Commissioners
Pasco County Tourism Development Office
7530 Little Road
New Port Richey, FL 34654
This executive summary is based on responses from 1266 surveys.
1. The most relied upon sources of information about Pasco County were word of mouth
(51%), knowledge from previous visits (47%), Internet (30%) and road signs (18%).
2. Primary reasons for visiting the County were: attending special events (23%),
beaches/sun/parks (20%), visiting friends and relatives (VFR) (16%), clothing optional
resorts (12%), and sightseeing/scenery (6%). Therefore, the largest tourism market
segment is festivals/events followed by beaches/sun/parks and then VFR.
3. Relative to the overall trip, visitors to Pasco County had been to Pasco County in the past.
More than 14 indicated they were first time visitors. Of those who had been in the past
(72%), most indicated they started coming in the 1990s. Most visitors said they come in
the winter season (43%).
4. Travel party sizes were typically two people (50%), the average travel party size was
3.22. About one-half (48%) were day visitors, one-half were overnights visitors (51%).
The distribution of visitors length of stay was bimodal. Visitor were either long term
stays (15+ nights, 31%) or weekend visitors (2-3nights, 30%).
5. The most frequently used accommodations were friends and relatives' homes (27%),
hotels/motels (25%) and resorts (24%). Mobile homes and campgrounds accounted for
about 24% of the accommodations used by visitors.
6. Travelers to Pasco County mostly traveled with family (52%), followed by friends (20%),
followed by friends and family (20%).
7. The most frequently participated in activities were attending festivals/events (42%),
swimming (36%), visiting friends and relatives (28%), visiting scenic areas (27%),
visiting a community park (23%), and visiting a state park or wild life preserve (17%).
8. The majority of decisions were made prior to leaving for Pasco County. A total of
thirteen of the twenty-one activities were decided prior to leaving. Eight of the twenty-
one activities were decided after arriving at the destination.
9. Overall, Pasco County received positive responses from visitors. The aspects of Pasco
County that visitors found most favorable were the good climate (M = 4.48), relaxing
atmosphere (M = 4.44), interesting and friendly local people (M= 4.35), attractive
scenery (M = 4.22 and beautiful greenery (M = 4.17). The aspects least favorable to the
visitors were good sporting events (M = 3.54), a variety of good bars (M = 3.69), and
good local transportation (M = 3.69).
10. Also, respondents were asked to indicate whether they would share their positive
experiences in Pasco County with others. Almost 85% of the respondents agreed that they
would share their experiences Pasco County while less than 3% of the respondents
disagreed. Eighty-four percent of respondents would encourage their friends and families
to visit Pasco County.
11. Respondents were asked to evaluate their intention to revisit Pasco County. Almost 95%
of respondents agreed that they would visit Pasco County again, while less than 1%
disagreed. Eighty-nine percent said they would revisit Pasco County again within the
next year. When asked if they would visit more frequently in the future, 81.7% agreed
with 2.9% who disagreed or strongly disagreed.
12. Overall, Pasco County received strong, positive ratings from visitors. The majority of
respondents (71%) rated eight or over eight for the quality of their experience. Only 2%
rated below five.
13. The sampled visitors were about equally female and male, about 70% were under 65
years of age, about 66% had no dependent children living at home, about 40% had
household incomes over $75,000 annually, just under half earned a bachelors degree or
had a high school degree. The majority of the sample was Caucasian.