Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework

Transcription

1 Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework 1

2 Presentation Overview What is the IVUMC? Why should I care? Four case studies informed by the IVUMC 2

3 The Interagency Visitor Use Management Council Mission: Provide guidance on visitor use management policies and develop legally defensible and effective interagency implementation tools for visitor use management.

4 Council Website 4

5 Council Products and Activities 5

6 Visitor Use Management Framework Why What Do How 6

7 Definitions Visitor Use Management: The proactive and adaptive process of planning for and managing characteristics of visitor use and its physical and social setting, using a variety of strategies and tools, to sustain desired resource conditions and visitor experiences. Visitor Capacity: Subcomponent of visitor use management Maximum amounts and types of visitor use that an area can accommodate While sustaining desired resource conditions and visitor experiences 7

8 Presentation Overview Four case studies for different physical, biological, social, and managerial settings: sparsely visited wilderness in Alaska (USFWS) high use urban setting in southern California (USFS); and wild and scenic river (NPS) 8

9 Sparsely-visited Wilderness US Fish and Wildlife Service Case Study Jen Reed 9

10 Refuges welcome wildlife-dependent public opportunities to connect with nature when resources and values can be conserved through effective visitor management. 10

11 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness 11

12 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness Meet the Tundra Wildlife Refuge 12

13 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness Meet the Tundra Wildlife Refuge providing landscape-scale solitude and thriving wildlife shared by boaters, hunters, backpackers, pack-rafters, and base-campers 13

14 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness IVUMC Decision Tool: How vast and challenging is my journey? IVUMC Framework: What path through this vast and rugged landscape? 14

15 Visitor Use Management Framework Sliding Scale Decision Support Tool Criteria - Use the ratings assigned to questions 1-8 to evaluate the following 4 sliding scale criteria. Combine those criteria into a single qualitative rating (H, M, L) of the project s appropriate location on the sliding scale. Rationale Low, Moderate, or High A Issue Uncertainty While there is some Low uncertainty about current conditions associated with use patterns, the difficultly of access and low levels of use mitigate this criteria B Impact Risk Low levels of use limit the risk Low of impacts C Stakeholder Involvement Lack of stakeholders Low minimizes this criteria to river users and outfitters D Level of Controversy/Potential for Litigation No controversy is expected Low Location on the Sliding Scale Low 15

16 Visitor Use Management Framework Why What Do How 16

17 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness Preserving unique opportunities at Tundra Wildlife Refuge Why needs, legal responsibilities known What unique opportunity qualities defined, tracked over time How workable strategies identified if threats emerge Do adjustments made as needed after implementation 17

18 Visitor Capacity Steps in Framework 1. Identify Analysis Area 2. Review Existing Direction and Knowledge 3. Identify the Limiting Attribute(s) 4. Identify Capacity 18

19 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness Estimating maximum amounts of use for the river corridor Corridor is analysis area CRMPS must identify user capacities is existing direction Encounter rates on rivers is limiting attribute Distinct capacities and rationales can be developed 19

20 Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness Questions? 20

21 High-Use Urban Settings US Forest Service Case Studies Bjorn Fredrickson Mary Ellen Emerick 21

22 United States Department of Agriculture Cleveland National Forest Case Study Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Two Urban Forest Case Studies Cleveland National Forest San Bernardino National Forest

23 Cleveland National Forest Case Study Extreme Growth in Visitor Use at Cedar Creek Falls Cleveland National Forest Case Study 1 23

24 planning Cleveland National Forest Case Study iterations to provide access, reduce impacts to natural resources, and provide for public health and safety Photo Credits: San Diego Union Tribune (this slide); San Diego Magazine (previous slide) 24

25 limited Cleveland National Forest Case Study facilities, threatened & endangered species, ongoing public health and safety incidents Photo Credit: San Diego Union Tribune 25

26 Cleveland National Forest Case Study Using the VUM Framework at Cedar Creek Falls Defining visitor use management direction and identifying management strategies: Alcohol prohibition Cliff closure Capacity limits Natural resource protection 26

27 Indicators, Cleveland National Forest Case Study Standards, & Adaptive Management Three indicators and standards used to determine effects of visitor use on natural resources Indicators included litter, wetland and riparian conditions, and user-created trails Results from ongoing monitoring prompted incremental changes in capacity Social and managerial indicators initially proposed but not ultimately included in management plan Photo Credit: San Diego Union Tribune 27

28 Cleveland National Forest Case Study A Changed Management Approach After three years of management visitor capacity frozen and routine indicator/standard-based natural resource monitoring ceased. 28

29 Cleveland National Forest Case Study Lessons Learned Step Four essential in maximizing public benefit and minimizing administrative costs in long-term The power of process in resolving controversial management challenges Internal and external discomfort with adaptive capacity determinations Approaches outside of traditional visitor use management can resolve management issues across agencies Strained relationships and rebuilding trust through proactive management Implications of social media 29

30 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Changing the Culture in Cucamonga Canyon San Bernardino National Forest Case Study 2 30

31 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Adjacent landowners, current illegal access, Rancho Cucamonga property, Water District 31

32 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Need for Change Short Video of Sapphire Falls Note: No Dialogue Sound of running water and muted voices as camera pans the graffiti - covered rocks. 32

33 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Using the VUM for Cucamonga Canyon Setting the Foundation: Committed stakeholders with different missions Urgent time frame A desire to leap to solutions 33

34 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Indicators and Standards Worksheet Issue Topic Indicator Threshold Threshold Rationale Management Potential Monitorin Example: Amount of litter Amount of litter hauled out weekly No more than one bag of litter hauled out weekly Litter impacts visitor experience and water quality. The more litter visitors see, the more they think it s acceptable to their own trash. Put trash cans at trailhead Hand out trash bags to visitors Volunteer clean up days Restrict use of plastic water bottles Weekly by CFPA, FS and/or 34

35 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Indicators were prioritized and developed by the group. Graffiti, vandalism, water dams and instances of SAR were included. 35

36 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Developing a Desired Condition Finding direct ties between visitor numbers/behavior and biophysical impacts is difficult! 36

37 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Next Steps 37

38 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Lessons Learned: Spending Time in Steps Two and Three Moving Past Stuck Communicating different agency requirements Public engagement piece The need for a cheerleader Different goals need to be considered (e.g. cleanup is very important to some) 38

39 San Bernardino National Forest Case Study Thank You! 39

40 Wild and Scenic Rivers National Park Service Case Studies Ericka Pilcher Rachel Collins 40

41 Visitor Use Management Process for managing characteristics of visitor use and setting Sustain quality resource conditions and visitor experiences Variety of strategies and tools Education Site management Regulation Enforcement Rationing/allocation 41

42 Components of Visitor Use Management Visitor Use Characteristics Timing and distribution Activities & types of use Behaviors Levels of use 42

43 Visitor Use Management & Visitor Capacity Sometimes, very little use can cause a lot of impact Sometimes, a lot of use causes very little impact Need multiple strategies to protect important resources and visitor experiences Strategies may include use limits, where appropriate

44 Components of Visitor Use Management Visitor Capacity the maximum amounts and types of visitor use that an area can accommodate while achieving and maintaining desired resource conditions and visitor experiences consistent with the purposes for which the area was established 44

45 Visitor Use Management & Visitor Capacity The concept of visitor use management has evolved beyond just capacity More complex than just numbers of people Impacts can result from many factors including Use patterns Activities and behaviors Resource type and resiliency Numbers of people

46 46

47 47

48 48

49 49

50 50

51 Proactively planning for visitor use maximizes the ability of land management agencies to encourage access and protect resources and values. 51

52 Possible Desired Conditions for Zones / Alts National Park Service Historic Photograph Collection

53 Possible Desired Conditions / Kinds of Activities

54 Possible Influences from Visitor Use

55 Indicators and Thresholds Natural Resource Indicators Indicator: the number of exposed tree roots per mile of trail Threshold: no more than 10 exposed tree roots per mile of trail Indicator: the percentage of the soil surface at a campsite with bare ground Threshold: 60% of the soil surface at a campsite is bare ground

56 Indicators and Thresholds Cultural Resource Indicators Indicator: Percent change in integrity of cultural resource condition every year. Threshold: 0% change detected on 80% of sites surveyed each year. Indicator: Number of incidents of vandalism to historic structures. Threshold: No more than 1 incident reported per year for every 20 sites surveyed.

57 Indicators and Thresholds Social Indicators Indicator: the number of people at one time on segment B of the trail Threshold: visitors will not encounter more than 20 people at one time on segment B of the trail, 80% of the time Indicator: the traffic congestion during peak visitor use days Threshold: roadways do not exceed level of service D for more than 10% of peak use days

58 Adaptive Management Strategies Possible Management Strategies Effective?

59 Adaptive Management Strategies Visitor Education and Regulation Promote low impact practices through visitor education (e.g., signage, presentations) Redirect visitor use patterns with information (e.g., Intelligent Transportation Systems, internet) Establish regulations on public use (e.g., no parking areas, require permits, limit on group sizes)

60 Adaptive Management Strategies Site Management Select resistant sites Use physical barriers (e.g., fencing, brush) Provide facilities to reduce impact (e.g. fire grate, boardwalk) Close areas or facilities Open new areas to disperse use Change size/number of facilities (e.g., resize parking lots)

61 Facilitated Discussion: Visitor Capacity 1 Identify the area of analysis. 2 Review desired conditions and known visitor use information. 3 Describe major concerns related to types and amounts of use. 4 Identify the relevant indicators and thresholds. 5 Ask the question: Are existing conditions within the threshold? 6 Identify range of potential management strategies. 7 Ask the question: What is the most limiting factor for determining the amount(s) of use that can be accomadated while achieving thresholds? 8 Describe current use levels and limits, then consider the target amount of use (increase, decrease, or maintain current levels). 61

62 Visitor Use Management and Visitor Capacity Process Examples 62

63 Zion: Virgin River Comprehensive River Management Plan Link to document: Home.cfm?parkID=113&projectID=

64 Virgin River Comprehensive Management Plan in Zion NP Purpose: To protect the river values (resources and visitor experiences). Legislation, NPS management policies and secretarial guidelines require us to address user capacity. Issue: Pulses of use during busy season, more people accessing the park trails at one time due to shuttle system, resulting in resource and social impacts Needed: Realistic management strategies to address issues and impacts caused by visitor use Developed: In addition to developing indicators and thresholds and determining numeric capacities; we are taking a comprehensive look at protecting river values by evaluating social and resource impacts, use patterns, activities, resource type, etc.

65 Link to document: management/mrp.htm 65

66 Merced Comprehensive River Management Plan in Yosemite NP Purpose: Protect and enhance the values for which the river was designated while providing visitor access and high quality visitor experiences. Issue: Crowding, in terms of number of people at one time, has been shown to negatively affect the quality of the visitor experience. Needed: Find a way to manage beaches along the river to provide for a variety of visitor experience expectations. Developed: Designated beaches as either high use or low use and developed a threshold for each designation.

67 Link to document: n/management/trp.htm 67

68 Tuolumne Comprehensive River Management Plan in Yosemite NP Purpose: preserve the Tuolumne River in free-flowing condition, and to protect the water quality and outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) that make the river worthy of designation, for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. Issue: Parking demand during peak visitation times exceeds the capacity of the designated parking areas, about a third of all visitors now park in informal, undesignated locations along road shoulders or around the edges of designated parking areas. Needed: Management strategies that would allow visitors to access Tuolumne Meadows while protecting the fragile meadow and alpine environment along roadsides. Developed: Actions to relocate parking to more appropriate locations to improve traffic flow and protect meadow habitats from visitor-created parking and trailing.

69 Leveraging GIS for Public Engagement

70 Leveraging GIS for Public Engagement

71 Presentation Overview Questions? 71

72 Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework 72