72
Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework 1
Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework
1
Presentation Overview
• What is the IVUMC?
• Why should I care?
• Four case studies informed by the IVUMC
2
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
http://visitorusemanagement.nps.gov/
Council Website
5
Council
Products and
Activities
6
Visitor Use Management Framework
Why
What
How
Do
7
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
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.
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
Sparsely-visited Wilderness
US Fish and Wildlife Service Case StudyJen Reed
9
10
Refuges welcome wildlife-dependent public opportunities to connect with nature when resources and values can be
conserved through effective visitor management.
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
11
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
12
Meet the Tundra Wildlife Refuge…
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
13
Meet the Tundra Wildlife Refuge…
providing landscape-scale solitude and thriving wildlife
shared by boaters, hunters, backpackers,
pack-rafters, and base-campers
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
14
IVUMC Decision Tool:
How vast and challenging is my journey?
IVUMC Framework:What path through this vast and rugged landscape?
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
uncertainty about current
conditions associated with
use patterns, the difficultly of
access and low levels of use
mitigate this criteria
Low
B Impact Risk Low levels of use limit the risk
of impacts
Low
C Stakeholder Involvement Lack of stakeholders
minimizes this criteria to river
users and outfitters
Low
D Level of Controversy/Potential for Litigation No controversy is expected Low
Location on the Sliding Scale Low
16
Visitor Use Management Framework
Why
What
How
Do
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
17
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
Visitor Capacity Steps in Framework
18
1. Identify Analysis Area
2. Review Existing Direction and Knowledge
3. Identify the Limiting Attribute(s)
4. Identify Capacity
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
19
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
Case Study: capacity in sparsely-visited wilderness
20
Questions?
High-Use Urban Settings
US Forest Service Case Studies
Bjorn Fredrickson
Mary Ellen Emerick
21
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
United States Department of Agriculture
Cleveland National Forest
San Bernardino National Forest
ManagingVisitor Use in
Diverse Settings
Two Urban Forest Case Studies
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
Extreme Growth in Visitor Use at Cedar Creek Falls
Cleveland National Forest
Case Study 1
23
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
Several planning 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
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
attention, limited facilities, threatened& endangered species, ongoing public health and safety incidentsPhoto Credit:
San Diego Union
Tribune
25
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
Using the VUM Framework at Cedar Creek FallsDefining visitor use management direction and identifying management strategies:
• Alcohol prohibition
• Cliff closure
• Capacity limits
• Natural resourceprotection
26
Cleveland National Forest Case StudyIndicators, 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
Cleveland National Forest Case Study
A Changed Management
ApproachAfter three years of
management visitor capacity frozen and routine
indicator/standard-based natural resource monitoring
ceased.
28
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
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Changing the Culture in Cucamonga CanyonSan Bernardino National Forest
Case Study 2
30
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Adjacent landowners, current illegal access, Rancho Cucamonga property, Water District
31
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Need for ChangeShort Video of Sapphire Falls
Note:No Dialogue – Sound of
running water and muted
voices as camera pans the
graffiti - covered rocks.
32
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Using the VUM forCucamonga Canyon
Setting the Foundation:
• Committed stakeholders with different missions
• Urgent time frame
• A desire to leap to solutions
33
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Indicators and Standards WorksheetIssue
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
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
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Developing a Desired Condition
Finding direct ties between visitor numbers/behavior and biophysical impacts is difficult!
36
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Next Steps
37
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
San Bernardino National Forest Case Study
Thank You!
39
Wild and Scenic Rivers
National Park Service Case StudiesEricka Pilcher
Rachel Collins
40
• Sustain quality resource conditions and visitor experiences
• Variety of strategies and tools– Education– Site management– Regulation– Enforcement– Rationing/allocation
41
Process for managing characteristics of visitor use and setting
Visitor Use Management
Components of Visitor Use Management
• Visitor Use Characteristics
– Timing and distribution
– Activities & types of use
– Behaviors
– Levels of use
42
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 experiencesStrategies may include use limits, where appropriate
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
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
47
48
49
50
51
Proactively planning for visitor use maximizes the ability of land management agencies to encourage
access and protect resources and values.
National Park Service Historic Photograph Collection
Possible Desired Conditions for Zones / Alts
Possible Desired Conditions / Kinds of Activities
Possible Influences from Visitor Use
• 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
Natural Resource Indicators
Indicators and Thresholds
• 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.
Cultural Resource Indicators
Indicators and Thresholds
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
Social Indicators
Indicators and Thresholds
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
Possible Management Strategies
Effective?
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)
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)
Adaptive Management Strategies
Facilitated Discussion: Visitor Capacity
61
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).
Visitor Use Management and Visitor Capacity Process Examples
62
63
Zion: Virgin River Comprehensive River Management Plan
• Link to document: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?parkID=113&projectID=32068
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.
• Link to document: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/mrp.htm
65
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.
• Link to document: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/trp.htm
67
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.
Leveraging GIS for Public Engagement
Leveraging GIS for Public Engagement
Presentation Overview
Questions?
71
Managing Visitor Use in Diverse Settings Using the IVUMC Framework
72
