This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected;
however, some errors may remain.
MANAGEMENT PREFERENCES OF RECREATIONISTS I N A SCENIC CORRIDOR:
OAK CREEK CANYON, ARIZONA
Deborah J. A l l e n , A s s i s t a n t P r o f e s s o r ,
Oregon S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ,
C o r v a l l i s , Oregon,
B. L. D r i v e r , P r o j e c t Leader,
Rocky Mountain F o r e s t and Range Experiment S t a t i o n ,
F o r t C o l l i n s , Colorado,
and Richard S h i k i a r , Director,
S o c i a l Change Study Center,
B a t t e l l e - HARC),
S e a t t l e , Washington
P u b l i c input has become a necessary p a r t of
p u b l i c land management planning (Bettwy 1978).
I n r e c r e a t i o n r e s o u r c e planning, information on
u s e r ' s p r e f e r e n c e s can be an important i n p u t
(Driver and Brown 1978). This paper r e p o r t s on
1977 and 1978 s t u d i e s of the p r e f e r e n c e s of Oak
Creek Canyon u s e r s .
Those s t u d i e s were
r e q u e s t e d by USDA F o r e s t Service managers t o
a s s i s t them i n developing a management plan f o r
t h e Canyon. Of p a r t i c u l a r concern t o management,
was information on user preferences f o r
r e c r e a t i o n experiences and management a c t i o n s .
Oak Creek Canyon is a s c e n i c c o r r i d o r t h a t
extends f o r 12 miles through t h e Mogollon R i m i n
n o r t h - c e n t r a l Arizona near F l a g s t a f f .
Because
Oak Creek is a p e r e n n i a l stream and t h e Canyon
c r o s s c u t s f i v e v e g e t a t i v e zones, the a r e a is a
popular s p o t f o r swimming, f i s h i n g , h i k i n g ,
camping, and p i c n i c k i n g i n t h e summer and f o r
s i g h t s e e i n g year-round.
For example, an
e s t i m a t e d 1 m i l l i o n people t r a v e l l e d through t h e
canyon, p r i m a r i l y f o r r e c r e a t i o n - r e l a t e d
purposes, i n 1977 and 1978. Similar t o most
p u b l i c r e c r e a t i o n a r e a s , use in the Canyon has
grown but t h e Canyon ' s narrow confines makes
i n c r e a s i n g number of v i s i t o r s d i f f i c u l t t o
manage.
METHODS
Using a combination of r o a d s i d e and o n - s i t e
i n t e r v i e w s and mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , we c o l l e c t e d
information on t h e r e c r e a t i o n and management
p r e f e r e n c e s of a r e a u s e r s during 1977 and 1978.
I n t e r v i e w s were conducted on randomly s e l e c t e d
days during t h e s t u d y period. Thir ty-f i v e
i n t e r v i e w days were s e l e c t e d from Memorial Day
t o Labor Day f o r t h e 1977 s t u d y , and 1,707
i n t e r v i e w s were conducted.
Forty-two i n t e r v i e w
days were s e l e c t e d from t h e middle of A p r i l t o
t h e middle of October f o r t h e 1978 study--20
days of i n t e r v i e w i n g occurred during t h e summer
months, corresponding t o the i n t e r v i e w i n g period
f o r t h e 1977 study. A t o t a l of 1,218 i n t e r v i e w s
were conducted f o r the 1978 study. R e s u l t s of
t h e 1977 study were used t o improve t h e 1978
study.
Mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were s e n t t o
i n t e r v i e w e e s who i n d i c a t e d t h a t r e c r e a t i o n was
t h e i r primary purpose f o r v i s i t i n g t h e Canyon.
Three mailings were employed t o i n c r e a s e
response r a t e s . Questionnaires were s e n t t o
1,129 u s e r s i n 1977, r e s u l t i n g i n a 55 percent
response r a t e (N-554) o m i t t i n g i n c o r r e c t
addresses (N=103). I n 1978, 908 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
were mailed, r e s u l t i n g i n a 61 percent response
r a t e (tJ=551), ommitting i n c o r r e c t addresses
(N=90). The mailback q u e s t i o n n a i r e asked
respondents f o r demographic information,
opinions of proposed management a c t i o n s , and
p r e f e r e n c e s f o r r e c r e a t i o n experiences.
SELECTED RESULTS.
The r e s u l t s of t h e 1977 and 1978 s t u d i e s
were g e n e r a l l y i n accord, i n terms of what Oak
Creek r e c r e a t i o n i s t s wanted from management and
what they wanted from t h e i r r e c r e a t i o n
experiences. A few of t h e s e r e s u l t s a r e
d i s c u s s e d below.
Land a c q u i s i t i o n i s important t o t h e ef f ic i e n t management of r e c r e a t i o n s i t e s i n t h e
Canyon because of the checkerboard p a t t e r n of
p r i v a t e l y and p u b l i c l y owned land. For example
a c c e s s t o some of t h e more popular r e c r e a t i o n
s i t e s is p r i v a t e l y owned making i t d i f f i c u l t t o
manage t h e s i t e s . Managers were i n t e r e s t e d in
u s e r s ' opinions of d i f f e r e n t methods of
a c q u i r i n g land i n the Canyon.
The mailback q u e s t i o n n a i r e asked u s e r s how
much they favored or opposed d i f f e r e n t methods
of land a c q u i s i t i o n by t h e USDA F o r e s t Service
( t a b l e 1). Users of the Canyon do n o t oppose
t h e USDA F o r e s t Service a c q u i r i n g l a n d , however,
they a r e n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n a "land grab" e i t h e r .
Canyon u s e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e most a c c e p t a b l e
T a b l e 1.--1977
u s e r o p i n i o n s concef41ng p o s s i b l e ways f o r USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e t o purchase
l a n d i n Oak Creek Canyon- --/
-
Possible action land acquisition
-
-
---
Favor
Percent
---
--
Oppose
P
e
r
N
-- c e n t
-
2
P u r c h a s e a s much p r i v a t e land
i n t h e Canyon a s p o s s i b l e
Neutral
P
e
r
N
-- c e n t -
-
P u r c h a s e o n l y t h a t land
necessary to maintain
f a c i l i t i e s and o p e r a t i o n s
P u r c h a s e p r i v a t e land3 as i t
comes on t h e m a r k e t 4
Acquire land tbrough
condemnat ion--/
p e r c e n t a g e s may n o t e q u a l 100 due t o nonrespondents and r o u n d i n g ~e r r o r .
2
-/Question was asked d i f f e r e n t l y i n 1978. Respondents had t o choose one of t h e o p t i o n s .
3
Z;/Most p r e f e r r e d method i n 1978 s t u d y .
-/Least popular method i n 1978 s t u d y .
~-/ROW
was t o a c q u i r e l a n d is t o purchase it a s it
comes on t h e market (84 p e r c e n t f a v o r e d t h i s
a p p r o a c h ) . Another a c c e p t a b l e method of
a c q u i r i n g l a n d i s purchasing o n l y t h a t land
n e c e s s a r y f o r e f f i c i e n t USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e
Acquiring land
o p e r a t i o n s (51 p e r c e n t favored)
t h r o u g h condemnation is n o t s u p p o r t e d by u s e r s
of t h e canyon (56 p e r c e n t opposed t h i s method).
a d d i t i o n a l swimming a r e a s t o d i s p e r s e u s e from
t h e a l r e a d y crowded swimming s i t e s was s t r o n g l y
f a v o r e d by u s e r s (71 p e r c e n t f a v o r )
L i m i t a t i o n s a r e n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y opposed by
u s e r s . Temporary r e s t r i c t i o n s on u s i n g t h e
c r e e k ( o c c a s i o n a l creek) c l o s u r e s and l i m i t a - .
t i o n s on t h e number of people were f a v o r e d by
u s e r s a s a means of improving water q u a l i t y .
Most Oak Creek Canyon u s e r s f a v o r management a c t i o n s t h a t w i l l i n c r e a s e t h e i r opport u n i t i e s i n t h e Canyon and oppose any a c t i o n s
t h a t w i l l l i m i t t h e s e o p p o r t u n i t i e s . T h i s is
a p p a r e n t i n u s e r p r e f e r e n c e s f o r management
a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r s o l v i n g t h e t r a f f i c problem i n
t h e Canyon and m a i n t a i n i n g t h e water q u a l i t y i n
t h e c r e e k ( t a b l e s 2 and 3)
Oak Creek Canyon's
p r i m a r y u s e by r e c r e a t i o n i s t s is a s a s c e n i c
c o r r i d o r . Most u s e r s a r e s i g h t s e e r s and spend
o n l y enough time i n t h e Canyon t o d r i v e through
i t and make a couple of s t o p s .
Its popularity
a s a s c e n i c d r i v e may c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e s t r o n g
o p p o s i t i o n t o any l i m i t a t i o n s on a c c e s s t o t h e
Canyon. Measures l i m i t i n g u s e a r e opposed by a t
l e a s t two-thirds of t h e u s e r s ( t a b l e 2)
However, expanding t h e f a c i l i t i e s t o accommodate
more u s e r s is f a v o r e d by about 60 p e r c e n t of a l l
respondents.
Users responded t o a s e r i e s of s c a l e s t h a t
have been developed t o a s s e s s u s e r s ' p r e f e r r e d
t y p e s of r e c r e a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e s . I n f o r m a t i o n
from t h e s e r e c r e a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e s p r e f e r e n c e
s c a l e s can h e l p managers d e c i d e how a r e c r e a t i o n
a r e a should be managed (Driver and Brown 1978,
Haas e t a l . 1980)
.
.
.
T h i s p a t t e r n of opposing r e s t r i c t i o n s and
f a v o r i n g more o p p o r t u n i t i e s is r e p e a t e d t o some
e x t e n t i n u s e r r e s p o s e s t o p o s s i b l e management
a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r improving t h e water q u a l i t y in
Oak Creek ( t a b l e 3). Users oppose t h e management a l t e r n a t i v e of doing n o t h i n g about t h e
w a t e r q u a l i t y (89 p e r c e n t oppose), but they a l s o
oppose e l i m i n a t i n g swimming (56 p e r c e n t oppose)
and moving t h e campgrounds away from t h e banks
of t h e c r e e k (47 p e r c e n t oppose). P r o v i d i n g
.
.
The r e s u l t s of t h e r e c r e a t i o n p r e f e r e n c e
s c a l e s a d m i n i s t e r e d t o Oak Creek Canyon u s e r s
shows t h a t s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t t y p e s of experienc e s a r e h i g h l y valued by t h e a r e a u s e r ( t a b l e
Enjoyment of s c e n e r y is t h e most i m p o r t a n t
4)
a s p e c t of a t r i p t o Oak Creek Canyon.
.
CONCLUSIONS
I n f o r m a t i o n on u s e r p r e f e r e n c e s f o r management a c t i o n s is u s e f u l t o t h e managers of Oak
Creek Canyon because t h e narrow c o n f i n e s of t h e
Canyon and l a n d ownership p a t t e r n s l i m i t a l t e r natives.
The r e s u l t s of t h e Oak Creek Canyon
s t u d i e s show t h a t a r e s u s e r s want more oppor-_
t u n i t i e s t o enjoy t h e Canyon, n o t fewer. T h i s
is e v i d e n t in t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n t o u s e r e s t r i c t i o n s and t h e i r s u p p o r t f o r more f a c i l i t i e s . i n
t h e Canyon. Users are w i l l i n g t o a c c e p t temp o r a r y r e s t r i c t i o n s on u s e , i f t h e purpose is t o
improve water q u a l i t y .
Table 2.--1977
u s e r opinions fp2cerning p o s s i b l e ways t o s o l v e t r a f f i c problems in
i n Oak Creek Canyon- --!
Possible action
~avora
---
oppose9
N
Neutral
Percent
N
-
Percent
-
Percent
N
Expand p r e s e n t parking f a c i l i t i e s
i n t h e Canyon
67
359
26
10 1
Move camping o u t s i d e of t h e Canyon
and allow day u s e only
22
117
66
352
Make the Canyon a s c e n i c d r i v e with
only l i m i t e d parking i n the Canyon
27
14 1
66
35 1
Maintain parking l o t s o u t s i d e t h e
Canyon w i t h a c c e s s t o the Canyon
being by bus.
Bus f a r e would
n o t exceed $2 -00 per person
24
124
70
370
Expand camping f a c i l i t i e s i n the
campgrounds
58
307
28
147
p
-
8
43
might not equal 100 due t o rounding.
g ~ h i q
s u e s t i o n was not asked ond the 1978 mailback q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
a ~ e s ~ o n s ewere
s
made t o a 7-point format on whether t h e a l t e r n q t i v e s were s t r o n g l y f a v o r e d ,
moderately f a v o r e d , s l i g h t l y favored, n e i t h e r favor or oppose, s l i g h t l y oppose, moderately oppose,
s t r o n g l y oppose.
~ R O Wpercentages
Oak Creek Canyon user
Table 3.--1978
water q u a l i t y i n Oak Creek
G'r e f e r e n c e s
f o r a l t e r n a t i v e ways t o maintain
.
-
Possible action
land acquisition
Favor
Percent
N
Oppose
Percent
N
--
Close t h e creek t o swimming when
water q u a l i t y is l 2 w enough t o
be a h e a l t h hazard--/
85
43 9
12
60
Allow f i s h i n g y n l y (no swimming)
i n t h e creek--/
34
168
56
276
Limit t h e number of people who can
u s e Grasshopper Point and S l i d e Rock
swimming a r e a s a t any one time
59
310
27
134
Move campgrounds away from the banks
of the creek
43
213
47
234
Do nothing t o improve or maintain
t h e water q u a l i t y
6
26
89
428
Provide a d d i t i o n a l swimming a r e a s
t o disperse use
71
346
18
86
Neutral
P
e
r
N
--c e n t -
3
14
Q ~ e r c e n t a ~ emay
s
not equal 100 due t o rounding.
a ~ o s favored
t
a l t e r n a t i v e i n 1977 p i l o t study.
a ~ e c o n dmost opposed a l t e r n a t i v e i n 1977 p i l o t study. The most opposed a l t e r n a t i v e i n 1977 was
"Redu e number of ca.mpgrounds," which was not an a l t e r n a t i v e o f f e r e d in t h e 1978 study.
%Responses were made t o a 7-point response format on whether t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s were s t r o n g l y
f a v o r e d , moderately favored, s l i g h t l y f a v o r e d , n e i t h e r favor or oppose, s l i g h t l y oppose, moderately
oppose, s t r o n g l y oppose.
Table 4.--Means
and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r t h e 10 most d e s i r e d types of r e c r e a t i o n experiences
1
i n t h e 1977 and 1978 Oak Creek Canyon studies--/
-.
Desired outcome s c a l e
----- 1977
Mean
-
Std. Dev.
-.-
--Mean
1978
Std. Dev.
-
Scenery
Tranquility
Escape
General n a t u r e experience
Seek open space
Family t o g e t h e r n e s s
Tension r e l e a s e
Exploration
Physical r e s t
Exercise
Learn about n a t u r e
Temperature c l i m a t e
Q ~ e a n s c o r e s based on a 9-point response format t h a t i n d i c a t e d whether each r e c r e a t i o n
experience preference s c a l e "most s t r o n g l y adds" (9) or "most s t r o n g l y d e t r a c t s " (1) t h e r e c r e a t i o n
s a t i s f a c t i o n r e a l i z e d with " n e i t h e r adds or d e t r a c t s " coded 5.
The r e s u l t s of t h e Oak Creek Canyon study
a r e not s u p r i s i n g . The Canyon contains a
p e r e n n i a l stream i n a d e s e r t environment. The
v a r i e t y of v e g e t a t i o n zones and t h e red rock
canyon w a l l s make it a very s c e n i c environment.
It is a l s o one of t h e few places i n t h e r e g i o n
where people can d r i v e through t h e bottom of a
canyon. Because t h e highway through Oak Creek
Canyon p a r a l l e l s a major i n t e r s t a t e highway, Oak
Creek becomes an a l t e r n a t i v e s c e n i c r o u t e .
O v e r a l l , it seems t h a t t h e most important
f e a t u r e of Oak Creek Canyon is i t s scenery.
Theref o r e , developments considered by management
should be made only i f they do n o t diminish t h e
p h y s i c a l beauty of the area.
LITERATURE CITED
Bettwy, A.L.
1978. Resource i n v e n t o r i e s and
agency d e c i s i o n s . I n Proceedings of
I n t e g r a t e d EtenewablT~esource I n v e n t o r i e s
Workshop. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep.
RM-55: 1-3.
Rocky M t . For. and Range Exp..
Stn., F o r t C o l l i n s , Colorado.
D r i v e r , B.L., and P.J. Brown. 1978. The
o p p o r t u n i t y spectrum concept of outdoor
r e c r e a t i o n supply i n v e n t o r i e s : an overview.
I n Proceedings of 1ntegrat.ed Renewable
Resource I n v e n t o r i e s Workshop. USDA For.
Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-55: 24-31.
Rocky
M t For. and Range Exp. Stn. , F o r t C o l l i n s ,
Colorado.
Raas, G.E., D.J. Allen, and M.J, Manfredo.
1980. Some d i s p e r s e d r e c r e a t i o n experiences
and t h e r e s o u r c e s e t t i n g s i n which they
occur. In Assessing Amenity Resource
Values. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep.
Rocky M t . For. and Range Exp.
RM-68 : 21-26.
Stn. , F o r t C o l l i n s , Colorado.
.