Grand Canyon National Park. National Park Service US Department of the Interior

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Grand Canyon National Park. National Park Service US Department of the Interior"

Della Poole
7 years ago
Views:

1 Carrying Capacity and Management of River Recreation in Grand Canyon National Park

2 Visitor Carrying Capacity The type and level of visitor use that can be accommodated while sustaining desired resource conditions and visitor experience in a park, 2006 Management Policies

3 There is no scientific formula to determine visitor carrying capacity for protected areas Carrying capacity is influenced by: Resources and values Scientific research Desired future conditions Legislation Management systems Judicial rulings Infrastructure Political preference Public values History and tradition Other recreation opportunities

4 In a recreation environment, some change in protected area resources is inevitable Structured process for analyzing and managing carrying capacity Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) LAC and VERP have a common foundation Specify desired resource and social conditions (standards) Monitor indicators to determine if existing resource and social conditions meet standards Manage recreation use to ensure standards are met

5 Components of Carrying Capacity Decisions Environmental resources Resources characteristics help determine the amount of change that results from recreation use Recreation experience Needs and wants of society help determine appropriate recreation opportunities Management system Agency laws, mission and policy suggest appropriate management objectives Financial and personnel resources suggest types and levels of recreation use

6 History of River Use in Grand Canyon 30,000 PASSENGER RS 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 TOTAL USE Commercial use Non-commercial use

7 Disappearing Beaches SMALL (n=12) MEDIUM (n=24) LARGE (n=36) TOTAL Number of Campsites

8 Research for the River Management Plan Visitor Surveys 1975 (n=562 trips) and 1998 (n=653 trips) Visitor preferences for group size, encounter rate, trip length, crowding, etc. Resource Maps Natural and cultural resources, sensitive sites Camping beaches, attraction sites, day hikes, etc. River Trip Computer Simulation Model Daily diaries from 494 river trips Sites visited, time spent at sites, trip speed, crowding, etc.

9 Contacts Per Day and Use Levels

10 Standards for Summer River Trips Standards 1989 River Plan 2006 River Plan Trips at one time Encounters per day Group size motor: 43 oar: People at one time 1, Days with >100 visitors at attraction sites

11 Management Actions Management Actions 1989 River Plan 2006 River Plan Launches per day 9 maximum 6 maximum Launch types per day commercial: 7-8 private: 1-2 commercial: 4 private: 1.5 Trip length - oars 18 days 12 days Trip length - motors 18 days 10 days

12 Monitoring, Mitigation, Management Program Visitor experience Encounters, campsite competition, launch patterns Natural and cultural resources Vegetation, wildlife, soils, water quality, archaeological sites Mitigation and restoration Campsites, attraction sites, trails impacted by recreation Education and outreach Educate guides and outfitters to minimize recreation impacts

LFA FORESTRY, FIRE, AND STATE LANDS I SSUE BRIEF UTAH STATE LEGISLATURE 2015 GENERAL SESSION. Summary

LFA FORESTRY, FIRE, AND STATE LANDS I SSUE BRIEF UTAH STATE LEGISLATURE 2015 GENERAL SESSION. Summary UTAH STATE LEGISLATURE 2015 GENERAL SESSION LFA LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ANALYST FORESTRY, FIRE, AND STATE LANDS NATURAL RESOURCES, AGRICULTURE, & ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF: IVAN