Strategies & Tactics for Managing Social Impacts in Wilderness · Strategies & Tactics for Managing Social Impacts in Wilderness ... Modify timing of use 4. Modify location of use

1

Strategies & Tactics for Managing Social Impacts

in Wilderness

Dr. Troy E. HallUniversity of Idaho

Overview• Common concerns related to

experience quality & their causes– Illustrations from interviews with visitors

• Overview of strategies and tactics• Case studies of ways tactics have been

combined

2

Wilderness Experiences“Outstanding opportunities for solitude

or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation”

Photo: Lisa Eidson

Types of Impacts

• Crowding• Loss of privacy• Conflict• Stress

Photo: Brad Johnson

“Right when we first walked in to where there’s all those campsites, there was a crowd there and we don’t want to be like next to everybody – you know, camp

right next to all them.”

3

Impacts to experiences are determined by several factors

Frequency of use

Type of User & Behavior

Envl. Conditions

Personal Chars.

Spatial Distribution

of Use

Intensity of ImpactArea of Impact

Total Impact

Amount/Frequency of Use

• “There are far too many people up here”• “This is probably about as heavy use as we’re

going to for fishing”• “It’s beautiful, pristine, but at this point there

are too many people”• “It’s early and there’s already a ton of people

up here”• “There’s a zillion cars and we passed a lot of

people.”

4

Amount/Frequency of Use

Use level Encounters Visitor Experience

? ?

1 mile

Trailhead

Obsidian FallsThree Sisters Wilderness

Amount/Frequency of Use

• Many factors influence the use → experience relationship

• Major differences seem to occur between no encounters and a few encounters

Photo: George Wuerthner

5

Spatial Distribution of UseDistribution of Use, Mt. Jefferson 2006

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Marion

Lake

Pameli

a Lak

e

Whit

ewate

r

Duffy

Lake

Pine R

idge

Trian

gulat

ion

Breit

enbu

sh La

ke P

CT

Sout

h Bre

itenb

ush

Woo

dpec

ker

Big M

eado

ws

Crow

n Lak

e

Maxwell

Roar

ing C

reek

Chea

t Cre

ek

Bingh

am R

idge

Crag

Num

ber

of V

isito

rs

Spatial Distribution of Use

• Often management concern is for areas of concentrated use

6

Spatial Distribution of Use –Day Use Destinations

“Every place that we found that was kind of an inlet was occupied by a camp group. So that was kind of disappointing.”

Spatial Distribution of Use –Campsite Clusters

“Being camped near the other people did detract from our experience… when you have people chopping incessantly and then there were a couple of 10-year-old kids that were running around and kept coming up to us and talking to us. They’re kids, but that’s not why I come out here. I didn’t want to meet any neat kids.”

7

Behavior and Type of Use

• Impact of others is often due to more than just the number of encounters

• Major factors– Group size– Mode of travel– Behavior

Behavior and Type of Use

“We ran into a few people on top of Horton Pass and that was the first people we had seen so that was cool. We talked about going up and how it was, we sort of enjoyed that.

Then we came down and there were more people, just huge groups of people. We ran into a group of like 8 people. We really didn’t interact with them, but it is sort of negative. You think, man, that’s a huge group.”

8

Behavior and Type of Use

“Between our near neighbors who were noisy and not particularly interested in abiding by the regulations and so forth, our camp experience was probably less than optimal … Somebody abandoned the camp and just left the fire going… Leaving a fire burning, it’s criminal stupidity.”

Environmental Conditions

• Environment affects the number and duration of encounters

Photo: Wilderness.net

9

Personal Characteristics

• Nature of the group and motivations• “Purists”• Expectations

Photo: Brad Johnson

Strategies & Tactics

10

Each factor can be influenced by management

Modify user expectationsPersonal characteristics

Modify location of useEnvironmental conditions

Prohibit/discourage behaviors

Type of user & behavior

Modify location of useSpatial distribution of use

Reduce/limit useFrequency of use

The 7 strategies for management of impacts

1. Limit/reduce use2. Modify type of use and/or visitor

behavior3. Modify timing of use4. Modify location of use5. Increase resistance of resource6. Modify user expectations7. Maintain and/or restore the resource

11

Considerations in selecting a strategy

• Know the problem – Its causes– Its extent– Trends

• Select a strategy– Consider factors that affect magnitude of impact

• Select tactics– Specific tools– Each strategy has multiple possible tactics

Considerations in selecting a strategy

• Select tactics, based on– Effectiveness– Cost– Visitor burden– Repercussions for other

areas (side effects)Photo: Brad Johnson

12

Tactics

• Indirect– Education– Site manipulation– Fees

• Direct– Regulations– Use limitation

Modify User Expectations

• Tactics are mostly indirect– Print materials– One-on-one

• Often limited utility for some impacts

13

Modify Type of Use and/or Behavior

• Tactics range from indirect to direct– LNT– Mandatory briefings– Restrictions

• Can be highly effective for some impacts, not for others

Modify Type of Use and/or Behavior

• Sometimes can be accomplished by other indirect means

14

Modify the Location of Use

• Designated campsites• Site manipulation

Tactics for Limiting/Reducing Use

• Education– On site– Off site

• Site changes– Reduce trailhead parking

• Fees

15

Tactics for Limiting/Reducing Use

• Quotas– Limit the number of

visitors– Limit length of stay

Tactics for Limiting/Reducing Use

• Effectiveness varies– Ability or desire to change the site may be

low– Fees may affect certain populations

adversely– Education is often not effective to reduce

use

16

Limit/Reduce Use

• Limiting use is sometimes the only effective way to reduce encounters

• However, it is often not well accepted as a strategy for promoting solitude

• And it has the potential for displacement• Limiting overnight use won’t solve the

problem in day use areas• Limits may be a way to protect opportunities

at low use places

17

Modify the Timing of Use

• Modifying timing of use is the same as reducing use during certain periods

• Therefore tactics are same as for limiting/reducing use

Two Case Studies

18

Mt. Jefferson Wilderness –Jefferson Park

• Collected data over 3 years• Collected trail & camp encounter data• Documented ecological impacts at sites

Jefferson Park

• Encounters approaching standard• Large proportion of overnight use• Many campsites, heavily impacted• Campsites highly visible around

lakeshores• Desire for tactics that accomplish

multiple objectives

19

What strategies might be appropriate?

1. Limit/reduce use2. Modify type of use and/or visitor

behavior3. Modify timing of use4. Modify location of use5. Increase resistance of resource6. Modify user expectations7. Maintain and/or restore the

resource

Limit/reduce use

• Decision not to limit use through regulation (quota)

• Avoid promoting Jeff Park

• Identify “high use area” on map

20

Modify visitor behavior• Campfire ban

– Trailhead information– Enforcement

Modify location of use

• Designated campsites– If < 250 ft from lake– Else, “at large” camping

21

22

Evaluation: Educational tactics to reduce use

• Costs? Low• Burden? Low• Effective?

– Can people comply? Yes– Will people comply? No– Improves conditions? Yes

• Side effects? Little concern• Overall Assessment: Worth the cost

Evaluation: Campfire Ban• Costs? Moderate (enforcement)• Burden? Initial visitor objections, but acceptance today• Effective?

– Can people comply? Yes– Will people comply? At this site, mostly yes– Improves conditions? Modest effect on solitude

• Side effect? Positive benefit for resource conditions; little displacement

• Overall Assessment: Effective

23

Evaluation: Designated Sites

• Costs? Moderate• Burden? Preserved “freedom” option; initial visitor

objections, but acceptance today• Effective?

– Can people comply? Depends, here yes– Will people comply? Generally, if easy to find– Improves conditions? Yes, improves solitude

opportunities• Side effect? Low. (There are enough sites.) Positive

benefit for resource conditions• Overall Assessment: Effective

Obsidian Falls -Three Sisters Wilderness

24

Obsidian Falls• Same monitoring data as Mt. Jeff• Encounters > standard

– Often, but not by a large margin• Use increasing• Large proportion of use is day trips

Obsidian Falls• Campsites

– Many sites near trails and water– Many good sites away from trails/water

25

What strategies might be appropriate?

1. Limit/reduce use2. Modify type of use and/or visitor behavior3. Modify timing of use4. Modify location of use5. Increase resistance of resource6. Modify user expectations7. Maintain and/or restore the resource

Tactics to modify location of use

• Campsite closure/restoration

26

Tactics to modify location of use

• Camping setback (regulation)

Tactics to limit/reduce use

• Educational efforts– Training office staff– Trailhead information– Wilderness information

specialists at trailhead

27

Tactics to limit/reduce use• Limited entry area

28

Use Limits

• Limited day and overnight use• 20 groups/day through trailhead

– Why 20?• All available for reservation• Available only at two ranger stations

– Possible due to access• Maximized convenience

Evaluation: Info/education to reduce use

• Costs? Low• Burden? Low• Effective?

– Can people comply? Yes– Will people comply? No– Improves conditions? Not really

• Side effects? Few, because not highly effective• Overall Assessment: Marginal

29

Evaluation: camping setback to improve solitude

• Costs? Moderate (enforcement)• Burden? Minimal• Effective?

– Can people comply? If they can judge distance– Will people comply? Not enough– Will social conditions improve? Yes, for campers

• Side effects? Site proliferation• Overall assessment: Immediate adverse effects on #

sites; good improvement in solitude

1 mile

Obsidian FallsThree Sisters Wilderness(pre-regulation)

30

1 mile

Obsidian FallsThree Sisters Wilderness(post-regulation)

Evaluation: Use Limits to protect solitude

• Costs? High• Burden? Least desirable• Effective?

– Can people comply? Depends– Will people comply? Usually (overnight)– Will conditions improve? Solitude yes

• Side effects? Moderate– Displaced those who don’t like regulations– Modified the timing of use

• Overall Assessment: Modest improvements in solitude; adverse effect on freedom

31

Conclusions

Photo: Scott Stouder

Conclusions• Consider the magnitude of the problem(s)

and the causes• Consider a mix of strategies – be creative• Be clear what problem each action is

intended to address• Think about unintended consequences –

Displacement? Campsite impacts?• Monitor the outcomes

32

Questions?Troy Hall

Conservation Social SciencesUniversity of Idaho

208 [email protected]

Photo: Gordon Ash