Opinions of Campers and Boaters at the Allegheny Reservoir

USDA FOREST SERVICE RESEARCH PAPER NE-307 1974 NORTHEASTERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 6816 MARKET STREET, UPPER DARBY, PA. 19082 F. BRYAN CLARK, STATION DIRECTOR WEAUTHORS GEORGE H. MOELLER is a research forester with the USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Sta- tion's research project at the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, New York. He holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in forest economics from Southern Illinois University and studied social research methods at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research. He joined the Forest Service in September, 1965, and has served at the Syracuse recreation project since March, 1968, RODNEY G. LARSON is the recreation staff officer on the Allegheny National Forest, ?Varren, Pennsylvania. He has a B.S. degree in Forestry Management from the University of Minnesota. His experience with the U.S. Forest Service since 1960 covers a range of resource management assignments in land use, land acquisition, administration, information and education, and outdoor recreation programs and planning. DOUGLAS A. MORRISON is a research associate with the School of Environmental and Resource Management, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He holds a PhD. degree in resource management from the University of Oregon. Since joining the college in 1969, he has conducted research in the social and psychological principles gover~ingleisure behavior.

The study reported here was carried out and funded as pa.rt of the graduate recreation studies program at the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry at Syracuse, N.Y.

MANUSCRIPTRECEIVED FOR PUBLICATION 2 APRIL1974 Opinions of Campers and Boaters at the Allegheny Reservoir

by George H. Moeller Rodney G. Larson Douglas A. Morrison

ABSTRACT Interviews with 157 campers and 281 boaters near the Allegheny reservoir on the Allegheny National Forest re- vealed that their perceptions of management problems differed from those of managers. Different users had different atti- tudes toward recreation use controls, fee policies, recreation zoning, law enforcement, and facility development needs. This diversity indicates that changes in recreation management policy will not affect all recreation users equally; their impact will depend on how active the users are, the number of activi- ties they participate in, and how familiar they are with the area. Fiqure I. - Sarnp,ling locations

Ig he !ny Reservoir, nal Forest.

Parties Sampled CAMPGROUNDS 1. Kiasutha...... 53 2. Red Bridge...... 30 3. Dew Drop...... 38 4. Willow Bay...... 15 Total 136 ] PENNSYLVANIA ( Pittsburgh Harrisbura BOAT LAUNCH SITES 5. Wolf Run Marina ... 60 6. Kiasutha...... 76 7. Dew Drop...... 53 8. Willow Bay...... 59 9. Roper Hollow. ....33 Total 281 THE STUDY PROBLEM State. At normal summer pool, the reservoir is 27 miles long and has 91 miles of shoreline. Recreation resource managers are con- Most of the land around the Pennsylvania fronted with the problem of managing fixed portion of the reservoir is administered by resources for growing recreation needs. the U. S. Forest Service as part of the Alle- Management programs must be developed to gheny National Forest. Others with vested balance conflicting recreation demands equit- management responsibilities include the U. S. ably while, at the same time, maintaining Army Corps of Engineers, Seneca Nation of the integrity of the natural resource, Indians, New York State Department of En- Recreation management decisions continue vironmental Conservation, Cattaragus Coun- to be made without adequate knowledge of ty, New York, and various private land- the recreation user, his attitudes, and his owners. opinions of management policies and problem The Forest Service has developed 17 rec- solutions. Past research has shown that re- reation areas on or directly adjacent to the source managers are not always able to per- reservoir. These provide for a wide range of ceive objectively management policies that recreational activities that include boating, are acceptable to recreation users (Hendee swimming, camping, picnicking, and sight- and Hccrris 1 9 70). seeing. Information about facilities and The purpose of this study was to provide services is provided through a centrally resource managers and planners with infor- located Forest Service information center mation about the attitudes and opinions of near the Kinzua Dam. The capacity of de- recreation users. Interviews were conducted veloped recreation facilities was increased with campers and boaters near the Allegheny from 2,480 people at one time in 1966 to reservoir in the Allegheny National Forest, 13,460 in 1972. in northwestern Pennsylvania. The results The Allegheny Reservoir has the potential of this study should provide recreation man- to be a major recreation attraction. It is agers elsewhere with better information on within 1 day's drive for over 80 million peo- which to base critical management decisions. ple (fig. 1). Since 1966, when the reservoir Although some recreation management prob- and recreation adjacent facilities opened, lems concern a particular area, many prob- recreation use has increased from 91,900 to lems discussed in this study- overuse of approximately 772,600 visitor-days per year2 facilities, control of resource use, law en- Projections are that recreation use could forcement, facility development, and user reach 5 million visitor-days by the year 2000.2 fees-are common to other heavily used rec- reation areas.

THE STUDY AREA 1 A visitor-day consists of 12 user-hours, which may be aggregated continuously, intermittently, or simul- The Kinzua Dam in northwestern Pennsvl- taneously by One Or persons- 2 Projection obtained from 1972 Reservoir Manage- vania' '.' east of Pennsyl- ment Plan. The possibility of reaching the projected vania, impounds the 12,080 acre Allegheny level depends on many companion factors such as im- Reservoir, 7,634 acres of which are in Perm- proved road systems, program funding, and recreation facility development by government and private in- sylvania and the remainder in New York terests. STUDY METHOD tivities, with fishing and visiting scenic over- looks as the most comn~on. Visitors were sampled at four developed The average boater respondent was 41 campgrounds and five boat-launching sites. years old and had 2 years of college. His They were selected on 20 randomly selected $11,150 median annual family income ex- weekend days and eight weekdays during ceeded the current national median by $650. June, July, and August, 1971. The self- He tended to work in a managerial or related designated "head'' of the camping group was occupation. Chances are four to one that he interviewed for the study of campers (Ap- had previously boated on the Allegheny Res- pendix B). Boaters were contacted as they ervoir. If so, he averaged 2.4 years of boat- returned to launching sites. Interviewers ing on the reservoir, and had spent 11 days briefly explained the purpose of the study boating on the reservoir in the year before and handed the person who was driving a the study. He averaged 8 years of total boat- questionnaire to be returned by mail (Ap- ing experience. Most typically he used a 16- pendix C). For non-power boats, the appar- foot boat powered by a 26- to 80-horsepower ent "head" of the group was the respondent. motor. His average investment in boating Interviews were allocated to recreation equipment was $2,500. He traveled an aver- sites in approximate proportion to their use age distance of 78 miles in less than 2 hours on the sampling day. A total of 157 campers to reach the reservoir. Chances are about and 281 boaters responded. Only two camp- even that he was also a camper. If so, he ers refused to participate in the study. An stayed an average of 4 nights. If he did not 89-percent response was obtained from boat- camp, he stayed on the water for an average ers after one follow-up mailing of the ques- of 5 hours. His group averaged 3.5 people, tionnaire. and chances were about even that it included children. In addition to pleasure boating, his most typical water activity was waterskiing, STUDY RESULTS followed by fishing and swimming. Respondent Profiles User Attitudes A brief discussion of the characteristics of What kinds of management problems do respondents will provide some background users perceive and which do they think are for the attitudes and opinions discussed most important? How do users feel about later. More details are given in Appendix A. current management ? What are their opin- It should be recognized that the two groups ions about management alternatives? surveyed were not mutually exclusive-that Most campers did not feel that facilities is, many campers boated and many boaters were overused. But they did see uncontrolled camped. camping-camping in areas other than desig- The average camper respondent was 42 nated campgrounds-as a problem. Camp- years old and had a high school education. ers criticzed current management for not His $11,000 median annual family income ex- having better facilities, more specialized ceeded the current national median by $500. services, better information services, and site Chances are even that he had camped on the registration procedures. The majority of Allegheny before the study. He had an aver- campers supported limiting the number of age of 6 years total camping experience. His campers, opposed higher fees, felt camping average investment in camping equipment- should be allowed only in designated areas, typically a tent or tent trailer---was $1,400. and favored regular law enforcement with He traveled an average distance of 160 miles appropriate punishment for violators. in 3 hours to reach the reservoir and stayed Most boaters did not view the reservoir for 5 nights. His group typically included as overused, nor did they recognize any ma- five people, husband, wife, and children. jor management problems. They did criti- They participated in a wide variety of ac- cize current management for not enforcing regulations, and saw a need for more launch- were correlated with their reaction, Seventy- ing sites, docks, campgrounds, and toilets. two percent of those who had camped in the Their general reaction toward various man- area for 10 or more days in the previous agement proposals was that zoning was not year mentioned two or more management needed but that more boat patrols, along with problems, as compared to 26 percent of those appropriate punishment of violators, were who had camped less than 9 days (P < needed. They were divided in their opinion .001) Sixty percent of campers who had of boat-launching fees. not camped on the reservoir during the pre- vious year mentioned two or more problems. Criticism of Current Management Respondents from large groups and those A management problem common to many in groups with larger numbers of children recreation sites is the excessive wear of mentioned more problems. Fifty percent of facilities and vegetation caused by heavy use. the respondents from groups of four or few- But when users were asked whether they felt er mentioned two or more problems, as com- the reservoir area was "overused," only 34 pared to 70 percent from groups of five or percent of the campers and 15 percent of the more (P < .05). The number of children in boaters said yes. Yet the reservoir and sur- the group, a closely correlated variable, rounding facilities are used to overflow de- showed a similar distribution, with 80 per- sign capacity on most summer weekends. cent of the respondents from groups with Of those who considered overuse a prob- four children or more suggesting at least lem, few related it to impact on natural con- two management problems, as compared to ditions, Most found it difiticult to define 47 percent for groups with three or fewer "overuse." A common definition referred to children (P < .01). "overcrowded facilities." Only 1 out of 10 Boaters campers defined overuse in relation to dam- age to the natural environment. Boaters Three out of four boaters felt that there connected overuse with crowding at launch- was at least one problem in reservoir man- ing sites. agement. Their criticisms fell into three categories : reservoir water management, Campers water facilities, and land facilities. The Three out of four campers expressed a most frequently expressed concern about concern for management of the Allegheny water management was the need for more area. They were most concerned about the patrols and better enforcement of regula- facilities and services available at camp- tions. On the water, boaters wanted more grounds. Although the campgrounds used in launching sites and docks; on land, more the study are already highly developed, with campgrounds and toilets were the needs flush toilets and showers, campers felt that most often mentioned. electricity should be available and that con- Local boaters, those who traveled 25 miles cessions and firewood should be provided. or less to the reservoir, were more dissatis- Second in importance were questions of ad- fied with reservoir management than other ministration and management policy. Camp- boaters. While 86 percent of local boaters ers wanted more information and closer registered at least one complaint, only 55 regulation through site registration. Camp- percent of those who traveled over 25 miles ers showed little concern about management had a complaint (P < .01). outside the immediate area where they were Other characteristics of the respondents camping. that were correlated with their satisfaction Overall, 6 out of 10 campers mentioned with management were income and conser- two or more problems related to manage- vation group membership. Thirty percent of ment. But their amount of past camping experience in the Allegheny Reservoir area and the composition of the camping group 3 Chi-square level of significance. boaters with family incomes less than $8,000 (32 percent). The more familiar boaters registered complete satisfaction, as compared were with the reservoir, the more likely they to 16 percent with incomes in excess of were to have a management complaint. $12,000 (P < -10). More boaters who were Three in 10 of those who boated within 1 members of conservation groups were satis- mile of launching sites were satisfied, as fied (34 percent) than boaters who were not compared to 2 in 10 of those who traveled members of conservation groups (22 per- greater distances (P < .lo). cent) (P < .lo). The type of boating equipment used was Perception of Management Problems also correlated with satisfaction. Boaters who used engines of 25 horsepower or less Campers were significantly (P < .01) more satisfied Campers were asked to give their impres- (55 percent) than boaters who used 60 sions of the severity of four management horsepower or lgrger engines (18 percent). problems. In order of perceived importance, A closely correlated variable, investment in they were : uncontrolled camping, unsanitary boating equipment, showed a similar rela- conditions, destruction of vegetation, and tionship, with satisfaction decreasing as in- littering. vestment increased. Uncontrolled camping-camping in areas Boaters who participated in land activities other than designated campgrounds - was were significantly (P < .05) less satisfied seen as a problem by 6 out of 10 campers (18 percent) than boaters who only boated (fig. 2). But campers who traveled less than

Figure 2.-Aerial view sf undesignated camping along reservoir shoreline. Such indiscriminate camping creates critical man- agement problems of law enforcement, site degeneration, and sanitation. 100 miles to reach the reservoir were more days or less, 38 percent; 10 to 29 days, 47 likely (76 percent) to consider it a problem percent; 30 days or more, 55 percent (I? < than campers who traveled 100 miles or more sool). (42 percent) (P < -05). Responses also dif- The type of water activity he engaged in fered between respondents from small and did not correlate ~iriitlithe boater" sperception large groups. While 70 percent of the camp- of crowding, but the number of different ers from groups of four or fewer felt uncon- activities did, Twice as many boaters who trolled camping was a problem, only 46 per- engaged in three or more wader activities felt cent of those from larger groups felt the crowding was a, problem as compared to those same (P < .lo). who engaged in fewer activities (P < .001). Overall, one in three calnpers felt that un- Boaters>perception of crowding appears sanitary conditions were a problem in camp- to be relateed to past boating experience and grounds. But among first-year campers, 2 in activity patterns. Where few types of -ivater 10 felt that unsanitary conditions were a activities are at~ailable, the manager can problem, as compared to 4 in 10 who had expect fewer connplaints about water areas camped on the reservoir for two or more that receive a high proportion of nonlocal years (P < .lo). and first-time boahers, Destruction of vegetation in and around Water pollution. - Water pollution was campgrounds was viewed as a problem by seen as a problem by 3 out of 10 boaters. one out of four campers. But as camping Significant differences were observed in experience increased, a greater proportion baaters>pel-ception of water poll eltion be- felt it was a problem-17 percent of first- tween local and nonlocal boaters, among time campers, compared to 54 percenhf boaters with different amounts of boating campers who had camped on the Allegheny experience on the reservoir, and among before (P < -05). boaters with different ed~acational baek- Only one out of 10 campers perceived grounds. littering as a problem. IVhile 45 percent of local boaters thought pollution was a problenl, only 19 percent of Boaters nonfocals felt it a problem (9< .01). More Boaters were asked to estimate the sever- of the boaters who had boated on the reser- ity of four problems. In order of perceived voir for 2 or more years felt that pollution importance, they were : overcrowding, water was a problem (41 percent) than first-time pollution, lack of rule enforcement, and con- or first-year boaters (P < .01). Sinlilarly, flicting water uses. More than half of the 38 percent of boaters who had boated during boaters felt that none of these was a problem. the previous year felt that pollution was a Overcrozuding. - Thirty-seven percent of problem, as compared to 17 percent of those the boaters perceived overcrowding as a who did not boat during the previous year problem on the reservoir, and the more ex- (P < .05). perience they had, the more likely they were The number of water activities engaged in to see it as a problem. Of local users, those was also correlated with perception of pollu- who traveled 25 miles or less, 59 pereent felt tion. PVhile 4 out of 10 boaters who engaged that crowding was a problem as compared to in 3 or more water activities felt that pollu- 20 percent of non-local users (P < .001), tion was a problem, 3 out of 10 who engaged While 16 percent of those who were first- in fewer activities felt it a, probleni (P < year boaters on the reservoir thought that .lo), Finally, alniost twice as many boaters crowding was a problem, 47 percent of those with high school or less education felt pollu- who had boated 2 years or more felt it was a tion was a problem as boaters with some problem (P < .001). Of those who had college training (P < .05). boated on the reservoir in the year before Lack of rale enforcement. - One out of the study, perception of crowding increased four boaters felt that lack of rule enforce- as number of days' boating increased: 10 ment was a problem. DiRerences in percep- tion of enforcement were closely related to Reaction to Management Proposals differences in perception of other manage- ment problems. Past boating experience, Campers activity, and group size were correlated with As recreation pressures increase, controls perception of rule enf orcement. are necessary to maximize the amount and VliThile 3 out of 10 Ioeal boaters perceived quality of recreation while preserving the lack of rule enforeenlent as a problem, only resource (Lime and Stankey 1971). Yet 2 out of 10 nonlocal users felt the same nianagers have often been reluctant to (P < .PO), Over half of the nonpower control use because of anticipated adverse boaters, twice as many as power boaters, felt reaction. that lack of rule enforcement was a problem The reactions of campers to seven control (P < .lo). The proportion of boaters who proposals were investigated : limiting the felt that lack of enforcement was a problem number of people allowed to use a camp- increased as boating experience increased- ground ; charging increased entrance fees ; 17 percent of first-year boaters, 29 percent limiting all camping to designated areas ; of 2- to 5-year boaters, and 33 percent of strengthening enforcement of rules and 6- or more year boaters (P < .05). Respond- regulations ; increasing patrols by uniformed ents from boating groups of two or less, law enforcement officers ; developing more who tended to be fishermen, more often facilities ; and restricting further camp- found lack of rule enforcement a problem ground development along the water. than boaters from larger groups (I? < .lo). Direct controls on use. - Campers were Conflicting use.-One out of four boaters asked tvlzether they felt capacities should be thought that conflicts between water activi- established for developed campgrounds and ties were a problem. The proportion de- use kept at or below these levels. creased as motor size and investment in Half the campers felt that capacities boating equipment increased (P < .001). should be established and enforced. When More than twice as many boaters who used asked why they felt this way, nearly 7 in 10 motors of 25 horsepower or less (53 percent) said that such control would eliminate over- felt conflicting use to be a problem as did crowding. Reasons for opposing controls boaters with larger motors. Forty-four per- were equally divided among: "It would be cent of nonpower boaters felt it to be a unfair to people traveling long distances," problem. Although half of the boaters with "all people have the right to use a public $600 or less invested in equipment felt con- recreation area," "there simply is no need flicting use to be a problem, only 14 percent to control use because no problem exists," of those with $3,000 or more invested felt and "maximum consideration should be given the same. Whether a boater was a fisherman to provide for as many users as possible or not influenced his perception of conflicting without controls." use. T/TThileonly 2 in 10 nonfishermen felt it Childhood residence and length of trip was a problem, nearly 5 in 10 fishermen were significantly (P < .05) correlated with thought so (P < .05). attitude toward use controls. Twenty-two Where motors of different sizes are per- percent of campers who grew up in farm or mitted, and where fishing is allowed in addi- rural areas felt that use should not be con- tion to other activities, the manager can ex- trolled, as compared to 67 percent of campers pect conflicting attitudes toward w-ater use. from urban backgrounds. Campers who The boater with a large motor appears to be stayed 8 days or more showed less support unaffected by boaters with small motors. The for limits on use than those who stayed opposite is not true - fishermen are influ- shorter periods-66 and 40 percent, respec- enced negatively by other activities but they tively. have little influence on other activities. Eyztmnce fees. - Campers were asked whether camping fees should be increased above the existing $2.00. They were told that a fee illcrease would more fully cover remainder felt a fee from $2-01 to $3.00 was campground maictenance and development reasonable. Few campers felt a fee higher costs. Campers were also asked what fee than $3.00 should be charged, even with level seemed most reasonable. Thirty-seven substantial facility improvements. The over- percent felt that, if necessary, fees sl-rould be all average of fees campers considered "most increased; 56 percent felt tbat fees should reasonable" was $2.16 (fig. 3). not be increased; and 7 percent expressed Campers from urban backgrounds were no opinion. twice as likely to stlpport an increase in fees Most campers felt that higher fees were as those from farm and rural backgrounds justified only if additional facilities and (P < .05). The total number of days they services, like electricity and water connec- camped during their current trip was also tions, were made available at campsites. related to campers' opinions of increased Campers who opposed higher fees argued fees, with half of the campers who stayed 7 that people should be able to use public days or less approving an increased fee, as recreation facilities at a minimal charge or compared to 20 percent of those who stayed free. 8 days or more (P < .05). Practically all campers agreed that a fee Controlled camping. --- Respondents were should be charged. One in 10 said the fee asked whether people should be free to camp should be less than the current $2.00, 6 in 10 anywhere or allowed to camp only in desig- said a $2.00 fee was about right, and the nated areas. Sixty-five percent felt tbat

Figure 3.-Central entrance points to designated campgrounds are used to control use and collect fees. Alt.kougk campers feel existing fee levels are justified, most are not willing to pay more even if additional facilities are provided. Figure 4.---On weekends and holidays, undesignated camping areas spring up all around the reservoir area wherever access

camping should be restricted to specified ilarly, campers who had camped on the areas. Although most agreed with a restric- Allegheny for more years showed less sup- tive policy, respondents felt that the policy port for controls than first-year campers would not work unless sufficient overflow (F < .05). camping areas were provided (fig. 3). En,f orcenzent of rzrsles and regulations.- Campers who opposed use controls argued All campers agreed that some form of repri- that the policy would restrict the freedom of mand or punishment should be given for those who sought a camping experience in a violation of rules and regulations. When semi-ltrtrimitive environment. Their general asked why they felt this way, three out of opinion was that "uncontrolled camping" five said reprimand or punishment is neces- was not a problem. sary to prevent destruction of resources and Over half of the respondents who lived facilities, One out of five felt that punish- in small cities and towns supported a con- ment was necessary to guarantee the free- trolled camping policy as compared to 77 don1 of otlier can-zpers. The remainder said percent of those from large cities (P < .05). that the threat of punishment was the only The more peol~le camped in the reservoir way to enforce rules and regulations effec- area, the less likely they were to support tively. controls. Half of those who camped for 8 Campers were asked what kind of punish- days or more felt that camping should be ment they would recommend for destroying restricted as conipared to 75 percent of those vegetation or facilities. They suggested four who stayed 7 days or less (P < .05). Sim- types of punishment: fines of $25.00 to $100.00 (69 percent) ; restricting the cul- to 9 nights wanted additional facilities prit's use of the facilities (12 percent) ; com- (I) < .lo), Campers who had been coming pulsory worIc to restore the area (15 per- to the Alleglleny for at least 2 years felt that cent) ; and a verbal reprimand for first-tinie additional facilities were needed twice as offenders (14 percent). often as did those who were eanlpil-ng there Lazu enforce??xe'~lt.-Eiglzty percent of the for the first year (P < -05). campers felt that regular patrols by uni- Rest~ictsho~eline deuetoj;rment,-Six out formed law enforcement officers were desir- of ten respondents disapproved of furll~er able, Four reasons were given: to protect canipground developn~entalong the reservoir campers and their equipn~ent(24 percent) ; shoreline, But they differed according to the to enforce rules and regulations (20 per- distance they traveled, their camping style, cent) ; to protect the resources and facilities and their past can~pingexperience. Campers (18 percent) ; and to give information and who had traveled less than 100 miles to assistance (15 peree~~t). Campers who op- reach the reservoir sl~owedalmost twice as posed regular patrols felt "cat eitl-rer they niueh support for restricting development as were not needed or that regular. patrols those who had traveled longer distances would restrict individual freedom. (P < -05). Althougla only 4 out of 10 tent As lnight be expected, only 70 percent of canlpers were for restricting campground the campers with less than $1,500 invested development, 7 out of 10 mobile home earnp- in their equipnnerat felt the ~zeedfor increased ers supported it (1) < -05). Campers who patrols, as comparecl to 90 percent of those had camped OM the reservoir for 2 years or wit11 greater investnienks (P < .05). more were more likely to support restricted Iac.rensed faeititits, - About half of the development than those who were camping respondelits felt that additional facilties were there for the first year (P < .05). needed. Respondents with diRerent back- grounds, those from differenhizes of camp- Boaters ing groups, those with dilTerent kinds of As the demand for water-based recreation camping equipment, and those with different grows, managers are increasingly concerned amounts of camping experienee showed dif- with maximizing use without adversely in- ferent response patterns. fluencing either water quality or boater Respondents frona urban backgrounds safety. Boaters were asked for their views were twice as likely to express a nesd for on five %rater-management policies : zoning increased facilities as those from rural back- the reservoir for recreational uses; charging grounds (P < .05). Similarly, twice as many boat-launching fees ; increasing punishment campers from groups of three or more adults for violators of water regulations ; increasing wanted more facilities as did campers from water patrols ; and increasing facilities. smaller groups (P c.05). Zoning.-Four out of 10 boaters felt that As would be expected, style of camping in- recreational uses of the reservoir should be fluenced campers9 attitudes toward facility separated by zones. Reasons given were that development. Tenters were evenly divided each water activity could proceed unhindered on the need for more facilities. Only 3 out and tliat boating would be safer. Major rea- of 10 who used tent trailers felt the need for sons for opposition to zoning were that zon- increased facilities as compared to 6 out of ing simply w-as not needed and that it would 10 mobile home users (P < .lo). unduly restrict individual freedom. Campers who stayed relatively sliort pe- Boaters' attitudes toward zoning differed riods and those who stayed relatively long with characteristics of the boating group. periods wanted added facilities. Of those For example, only 37 percent of the respond- campers wlno stayed 3 nights or less, 64 per- ents from groups with children supported cent wanted increased facilities as did 56 zoning, but 51 percent from groups without percent who stayed 8 nights or more, But children supported it (P < .05). Boaters only 40 percent of those who stayed from 4 under 50 years of age were almost twice as likely to support zoning as tliose over 50 ments were necessary to protect individual (P <,01). freedom. Part of the difference in boaterskttitudes IVhen boaters were asked what kind of toward zoning depended on their activities. action shot~ldbe taken against first-time vio- Although 73 percent of the respondents who lators, responses were equally divided among fished favored zoning, only 39 percent of a verbal repriniand, sttspension of boating those who did not fish felt zoning was needed privileges, a mandatory water safety educa- (P < .05). The more active boaters were tion program, and a fine of from $1 to $100. less likely to support zoning. Half of the Regulttr zrinter patrols. - Boaters were boaters who engaged in only one water ac- asked whether they felt regular water pa- tivity favored zoning, while 3 out of 10 who trols were needed. Eighty-eight percent said participated in two or more activities sup- they were. Half of those who favored patrols ported it (P < .05). Fifty-five percent of felt they were needed to enforce rules and the respondents who did their boating within regulations. Another one-quarter said regu- 1 mile of their launch site supported zoning, lar patrols would improve water safety, and as compared to 38 percent of those who 10 percent said patrols would provide assist- visited more remote parts of the reservoir ance when needed. No characteristics of (P < .05). Boaters who also camped were the respondent or group were found to be twice as likely to support zoning as day-use related to the boater's attitude toward regu- boaters (P < .05). lar water patrols. Lnunchi~gf ees.---Boaters were evenly di- Increase facilities. - Overall, 6 out of 10 vided on their attitude toward boat-launch- boater-respondents wanted more boating fa- ing fees. Of those who opposed lanching cilities, such as docks, launching sites, and fees, half felt that the public should not be marinas. But this attitude was not shared charged for using public boat launchings. evenly by ail se,gments of the boating Another ten percent said that launching fees popt~lation. would discriminate against the economically Although 78 percent of the boaters under disadvantaged. Others felt that launching 40 years of age expressed a desire for more fees should be included in camping fees and facilities, only 40 percent of those 40 or over that separate launching fees would be appro- felt the same (P < .05). Local boaters - priate only for day-users. those who had traveled 25 miles or less - Boaters who were for charging a fee said were twice as likely to express a desire for it would be justified only if existing launch- increased facilities as boaters who had ing facilities were improved. The daily fee travel 200 miles or more (P < .05). suggested by 9 out of 10 boaters who sup- The length of time boaters were on the ported launching fees averaged $1.25. Some reservoir the day they were interviewed was boaters felt an annual fee would be more also related to their attitude toward facility equitable. needs. Among day-use boaters, 7 out of 10 The only difference among groups in their of those who boated 4 hours or less wanted attitude toward launching fees was that increased facilities, as compared to 4 out of twice as many respondents from groups 10 of those who boated 5 hours or more without children were willing to pay a fee as (P < .01). Fifty-nine percent of boaters those from groups with children (P < .05). who camped overnight at campgrounds ac- A closely correlated variable, total group cessible by boat desired increased facilities. size, showed a similar relationship. The type of boating equiprr~entand the Puaishezeat for violations. - Nearly all amount invested in it were related to the boaters favored some form of punishment boater's attitude toward the need for more for violation of water regulations. Half of facilities. Among power boaters, those who them felt that adequate punishment would used motors of 30 horsepower or more were prevent damage to the reservoir and improve three times as likely to express a desire for water safety. One-quarter felt punish- increased facilities as those who used small- er motors (P < .01). The proportigon of traveled and length of stay-the farther peo- boaters who wanted more facilities also in- ple traveled, the longer they stayed. This creased as the amount invested in equipnient relationship has direct application to facility increased-17 percent, 53 percent, and 64 and administrative planning. Data on the percent, respectively, for boaters with equip- origins of visitors can be used to make con- ment investments of less than $600, $600 to sumption forecasts that reflect changes in $1,500, and more than $1,500 (P < .01). population distribution and travel! systems. Visitor-origin data can also be used to direct informtion and education more selectively MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS through press releases, radio, and television. The modern camper is often thought of as The results of this study have direct appli- using highly mobile, self-contained, sophis- cation to planning and management of the ticated camping equipment. Our study re- A1Teghepy Reservoir area. But the informa- sults indicate that this type of camper has tion should be useful in other places where not entirely replaced the conventional tent lnanagement decisions need to be made and camper. On the other hand, 95 percent of where knowledge of the recreation user, his the boaters used power boats, and most used Our attitudes and opinions, is incomplete. motors of more than 40 horsepower, These data on the characteristics of recreation different visitors require different kinds of users can be compared to the characteristics facilities. As this study shows, users are not of users in other areas to estimate the ap- unanin~ous in their assessment of facility plicability of our results. needs. Both differences and similarities were Differences Between Users found betweell campers and boaters. These Fewdifferences weye found between camp- Can be important considerations in phnninff ers and boaters in age, income, or occupation. and designing facilities. They did differ, however, in past visitation, length of stay, distance traveled, education, User Satisfaction investment in equipment, group composition, and recreation activities. Although managers commonly feel that Recognition of similarities and differences recreation resources are overused, neither between groups of users provides insight into group in this study felt overuse to be a seri- their needs. For example, both campers and ous problem. They tended to see "overuse" boaters averaged rnore than 5 years of pre- as crowding that influenced their own rec- vious experience, but campers were more reation experiences. Few related overuse to likely to be first-year visitors. Knowing this impact on natural resources. At least in the makes it possible to direct orientation pro- mind of the user, the carrying capacity of a grams toward those most in need of them. recreation resource is determined rnore by Information on how long people stay is the effect of crowding on user satisfaction also valuable in making management deci- than by site deterioration (fig. 5). sions. In this study, over half of all campers When asked whetlier capacities should be stayed 6 days or more. Half of the boaters established and use limited to them, half of were day-users. Most boaters who camped the campers felt such a policy would be de- stayed 5 days or less. Although most boating sirable. Planners and managers should rec- takes place on weekends, camping is more ognize that the level of recreation use can evenly distributed through the week. This directly influence the quality of the experi- information can help to establish rnore effec- ence. The exact influence that a controlled- tive administrative staffing and mainte- use policy would have on user satisfaction is nance schedules, and to develop policies de- not presently understood. signed to reduce peak use pressures. Our findings support the notion that the A relationship was found between distance carrying capacity of a recreation area is not Figure 5.-The Allegheny Reservoir near Cornplanter bridge. As recreation use increaser from spring to summer, crowding resulPs in physical and biological site degenerafisn. Recreation users assaciafe crowding with a redrac"rion in +he qualify of Iheir recreation experience. determined solely by the ability of the area Perception of to sustain heavy use, but also by the ability Management Problems of the management system to sustain a par- Recreation users and managers perceived ticular level of user enjoyment (Chubb cr~d and reacted to management problems differ- Ashton 1969). ently. While managers thought littering, Wlien asked to criticize management, both unsanitary conditions, and destruction of campers and boaters emphasized the facili- vegetation were serious problems on the Al- ties and services provided. As basic needs legheny, campers did not feel that these were are provided for, "needs" seem to become problems. But uncontrolled camping was more sophisticated. For example, once an seen as a problem by both managers and area is designated for camping, facility needs campers. expand from pit to flush toilets, from a cold The manager and recreation user look water faucet to hot showers, and from no at "management problems" from different services to concession facilities. Boaters' perspectives. While the manager is con- needs expand from launching sites to dock cerned both with meeting present demands space ; from no service facilities to inter- and preserving the resource, the user is con- mediate facilities, such as bait shops, boat cerned with short-term consumption of the rentals, and tour boat rides, and, eventually, resource. These two perspectives must be to the sophisticated services offered by a full- carefully balanced to make equitable deci- service marina. Planners and managers sions about resource policy. must understand the potential consequences Our study indicates that different users of this process-haphazard facility develop- perceive management problems differently. ment, added maintenance costs, and disjoint- For campers, familiarity with the camping ed planning. Recreation managers and plan- area increases perception of management ners should recognize the commitment they problems - particularly unsanitary condi- make for the future at each planning step in tions and destruction of vegetation. In the recreation development process. camping areas with a large proportion of repeat visitors, the manager can expect more Recreation users are not unanimous in critical users. Uncontrolled camping, as de- their attitude toward management. Our fined in this study, is viewed as a problem study indicates that users who are more fa- by campers who live near the reservoir. niiliar with a recreation area-because. they They are also likely to be repeat visitors and either come more often, stay longer, come more familiar with the area. Managers of from nearby communities, or are more ac- campgrounds that attract a high percentage tive - are less satisfied with management of large groups are likely to have difficulty than those who are less familiar with the restricting camping to designated areas be- area. Therefore, the manager who serves a cause, as this study shows, large groups do population of users who are quite familiar not perceive uncontrolled camping as a with his area can expect a high proportion problem. of relatively dissatisfied users. Boaters differ in their perception of man- Satisfaction with management also de- agement problems as campers do. Boaters pends on user-group characteristics. For who were familiar with the reservoir, either example, this study shows that larger camp- because they lived nearby, boated more often, ing groups, particularly those with children, or participated in more water activities, per- are less satisfied than smaller groups-they ceived more management problems. Boaters require more from management. For boat- who used small motors or none, and those ers, satisfaction with management decreased who fished, felt strongly that conflicting uses as investment in equipment and income in- of the reservoir and lack of adequate rule creased: higher-inconie users with more ex- enforcement were management problems. pensive equipment expect more from man- Nonfishermen and boaters who used large agement. motors did not share these feelings. Reaction to water, the manager can expect controversy Management Proposals over the need for zoning. Control of recreation use, either throtlgh Boaters from groups with children and space allocation or direct controls on num- those from larger groups were more likely to bers of users, is seen by both the manager be opposed to launching fees than other boat- and user as a necessary part of future re- ers. Boaters who used the reservoir more- source planning. But support for it is not either because they lived nearby, stayed on unanimous among all segments of the rec- the water longer, or had larger, more expen- reating public. sive boats-showed more support for a-ug- For campers interviewed in this study, nienting boating facilities than other boaters did. childhood residence - where the respondent lived before the age of 16-was significantly correlated with attitude toward management CONCLUSIONS proposals, Those with rural backgrounds Any change in recreation management is showed less support for controls on recrea- likely to have different impacts on different tion use, cl~angesin fees, and added facility recreation users. Resistance will be encoun- development, than campers with urban back- tered unless the change affects all segments grounds. As urbanization of the population of the recreating population favorably. Rec- continues, the manager can expect that more reation users are likely to support a policy campers will support these policies. "as long as it's fair." Thus the major issue A manager who attempts to establish use in changing recreation management policy is controls can expect resistance from local defining what is "fair" and what is "unfair" users and from those who camp for extended to which se,ments of the recreating public. periods. Campers who had camped on the The following points, condensed from this Allegheny during more than 1 year were study, may help to resolve this issue. more in favor of increased facility develop- 0 Recreation users see an infinite resource, ment and less in favor of restricting further if not in space, certainly in time. They campground development along the shore are concerned with their own experience than were other campers. Campers who which has fixed time and space require- camped for longer periods showed less sup- ments. This perspective needs to be rec- port for establishing capacity use standards, onciled with management planning. restricting use to designated camping areas, 0 Changes in rules and regulations and their and changing fees. enforcement affect the recreation public Camping style was correlated with camp- equally. Most other changes are likely to ers' attitudes toward management. Tent affect local users differently from non- campers were less in favor of restricting local users. where camping is permitted and restricting o Policy changes will have different impacts further campground development along the on users depending on how active the reservoir than were other campers. Tent users are, either in terms of the number campers, who were usually in groups of four of activities they participate in or the or fewer, also did not feel the need for in- distance they cover. creased facility development as did other 0 Desires and "needs" change with the level campers, who were usually in larger groups. of recreation facility development ; conse- Different segments of the boating popnla- quently the impact of management deci- tion also react differently to management. In sions depends on the existing degree of this study, fishermen endorsed zoning, but facility development. all other boaters, particularly those with chil- Recreation users agree with decisions that dren and those who participated in a large are equitable and do not excessively re- number of water activities, showed little sup- strict individual freedom. But the user port for zoning. Where many recreational must be given the rationale for a particu- activities are permitted on the same body of lar management decision. LITERATURE CITED

Chubb, Michael, and Peter G. Ashton. Lime, David W. and George H. Stankey. 1969. PARKAND RECREATION STANDARDS RESEARCH : 1971. CARRYINGCAPACITY : MAINTAINING OUTDOOR THE CREATION OF ENURONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROLS RECREATION QUALITY. In Recreation Symp. Proc. FOR RECREATION. Tech. Pap. KO. 5, Dep. Parks and NE. Forest Exp. Stn., Upper Darby, Pa. pp. 174- Recreation Resour.,Coll. Agric. and Nat. Resour., 184. Nich. State Univ., E. Lansing, Mich. 76 p. Bendee, John C. and Robert W. Harris. Tribe, Charles B. 19'70. FORESTERSPERCEPTION OF WILDERNESS-USER 1972. RECREATIONCARRYING CAPACITY. U SDA For- ATTITUDES AND PREFERENCES. J. For. 68 (12) : 759- est Serv., Northern Region, Div. Recreation and '762, illus, Lands, 23 p.

APPENDIX A Characteristics of Respondents

Table I.-Distribution of respondents by income Table 4.-Distance traveled from home class, compared with national population to the reservoir

Annual family income Campers Boaters Census Distance traveled Campers Boaters (dollars) (Nx157) (Nz281) 1970 (miles) (N=157) (N=281) --- Percent - - - Percent Percent Less than $3,000 3 0 9 0 - 25 12 36 $ 3,000 to $ 8,000 18 16 28 26 - 50 4 7 $ 8,001 to $12,000 48 43 3 1 51 - 100 17 23 $12,001 to $20,000 26 30 21 101 - 150 34 21 More than $20,000 5 11 1I 151 - 200 15 11 201 + 18 3

Table 2.-Camping equipment

Campers Equipment (N= 157) Length of Campers Boaters stay (nights) (Nz157) (NI-281) Percent Percent Percent Tent 36 Tent trailer 26 Oa 0 4 6 Trailer 24 1-5 9 19 Pickup camper 10 3-5 34 20 Mobile home 4 6-7 23 8 8- 11 20 5 12 - 14 14 2 a Did not stay overnight.

Table 3.-Motor size

Boaters Horsepower (N= 267) a Percent 10 or less 11 - 25 26 - 40 41 - 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 Over 100 a Excludes 5 percent of boats that were non-powered.

15 Camper Questionnaire

RECREATION MANAGEMEm STUDY - ALLEGHENY NATIONAL FOREST

CAMPER INTE WIEiY SCHEDULE

Interviewer Instruction: Interview the head of the camping group. If more than two groups are present at the site, select the respondent by tossing a coin. Record information below and introduce yourself as follows:

"Good morning (afternoon), sir, I am a graduate student at the New York State College of Environmental Science and Forestry at Syracuse, New York, I am conducting a study of camper opinions concerning recreation management problems on the Allegheny National Forest. The study will provide managers with the information they need to improve the recreation services that are provided for people like yourself. You have been randomly selected from among the campers here today to express your opinions concerning management policies. Can you spare 15 minutes for a brief interview? Your answers will be held in strict confidence and will be used only to represent the view of a typical camper."

Fill in this information:

Sex of Respondent: M ( ) F ( ) Type of Equipment: Tent

Race of Respondent: Black Tent Trailer

'bite Trailer

Other Pick-up Camper ?;obi le Camper

Use intensity estimate:

Campground: Full ( 1

3/4 Full (

112 Full ( )

114 Full ( )

Or Less ( ) Interviewer:

Jeather :

Date:

Campground Name:

Site Number:

Sampling Ratio: Q 11, How many people am in your aping group today? Person (relationship to respondent) (resmndent)

& 2, How wany ye- have you been camping? Q 3, How many years have you been coming to the Allegheny National Forest for recreation? Q 4, How many yeaxs have you camped on the Allegheny National Forest? Q 5, How many days did you spend canping (anywhere) last year? Q 6. a, How many days did you spend amping on the Allegheny last year?

b, How much of this was done on the Reservoir? (days ) Q 7, What am your reasons for visiting the Allegheny National Forest thZs trip?

$ 8, HOW naw nights have YOU already spent How many %ore nights do you plan to stay?

Q 9, ctn this carnping trip, could you tell me the places you have visited on the Allegheny National Forest and what activities you have participated in?

Q 10, Are you a member of any conservation group, outdoor club, or other organized recreation group? (~ist) ! --Memberships Years in Melnbership

--Interviewer Read: !'As a typical campex on the Allegheny National Forest, we are interested in how you feel about management of the campground around the Reservoix, "

Q I , a, Is there anything about these camping areas that you would like to see b, ghat do you feel remation managers should do, if anything, about these problems?-

Q 12, From your experience with these camping areas, would you say that any of the fol'lowizg are problems? (~skin order and check response): Unsanitary Vegetative Uncontrolled Littering Conditions Destruction Camping (define 2 Yes Mo Undecided

Q 13. a, What is your impression of the overall use intensity of aping areas around the Bservofr? (Check), Greatly overused Sl%ghtlyoverused - 13eitir~eroverused nor underwed -- Slightly underused Greatly underwed No opinion

b, Woufd you say that this ares is 'being overwed torfay?

Q 14, Will you tell lnte ??hat -the phrase "iovemse" means to you?

Internfewer Read: In order to eliminate problem of overuse and L~provethe recreation experience, recreation raanagem have considered several management ~posals,We would be interested in your reactions to these proposals.

Q 15, a, So~erecz..eation managers feel that anyone should ?x? able to camp anywhere. Qther mamgers suggest that the number 02 people per day be limited to reduce $roblens of lfttering, sanitation, and vegetrttive destruction that result froin heavj use, Haw do you feel? ( ) Awe xi-t;'n unlimited *use

( ) Agree with limited use b, Why do you feel this way? id & 16, a, Sorae recreation mwers feel that camping should be Bnade available at a mi-= fee, Others suggest that a higher fee, sore in line with those charged at shila;b. comercial ounds, would insure that more ~oney could be available for your proper nraintenance and hpro nt of the area. HOW do you feel?

( ) Approve niihunn fee ( ) Neutral f: ) Apprm of higher enkcan- fee b, Why do you feel this way?

c, What dail~fee seems most masonable to you? & 17, a, Sme recreation mnagers suggest that campers should be allowed to camp any- where on the Forest, This would provide all recreationists the opportunity to ctamp where they want to amp, Other managers feel that -ping should only be allowed fn designated areas to control littering, unsanitaxy conditions, and vegetative destruction, How do you feel? ( ) Feel that camping should be allowed anywhere on-.the Forest ( ) Neutral ( ) Feel that earnpi- should be only in designated azeas

b, Why do you feel this way? (~eyquestion--- robe).

& 18, a, Some recreationists feel that the enfoscement of rules and reg-v;Lations tends to restrict their sense of freedom in this outdoor envimrment, Others feel that a reprimand should be given to anyone, found defacing recreation facfiities or destroying vege-ktion, Still others feel that offenses such as these wa,rrant some form of punishment, How c?c you feel? ( ) Want sense of freedom? ( ) Approve of Reprimand? ( ) Approve of punishment?

b, Why do you feel this wa,y?

c, (1f respondent approves of reprimand or ~rnshntent), If apprehended, what sort of reprimand or punishment should be ordered?

The question elements for questions 16 through 21 were reversed on half of the questionnaires to reduce the possibility of response bias due to question structure, pers feel that uniformed law enforcement officers regularly patrolling the reservoir area would tend to detract from their reclreatiofl~cl experience, while others feel that a patrol would be a good idea, How do you feel? ( ) Do not want a regular patrol ( ) Neutral ( ) Agree with value of a regular patrol b, Why do you feel this way?

Q 20, a, Some visitors feel that the character of the Reservoir axea would be ruined with-the development of additional facilities. Others feel that the area should be developed with additional facilities. How do you feel?

( 3 ' Additional facilities not needed ( ) Neutral ( ) Additional facilftiea rre needed b, Mhj do you feel this way?

6. (1f respondent wants additional faoilities). What additional facilities would you suggest?

Q 21, a, Same managers have suggested expansion of shoreline ca~apin~~faoilftfes; But others feel that the interests of laore people would be served, in the long run, if new camping facilities were constructed a mile or more away front the shoreline, How do you feel about this?

( ) Agree with expansion of shoreline camping facilities ( ) Neutral ( ) Agree with restricting additional shoreline camping facilities b, Why do you feel this way?

Q 22. a, How do you feel about the nrnaber of recreationiats in this vicinity tay? Does it tend to reduce the area's recreational appeal? ( ) yes ( ) Neutral ( 1 No b, Why do you feel this way? Interviewer Instruction : ( kand respondent cardr, and enter ~ppropriateresponses a Using this casd and beginning with Question 23, could you please tell me:

Q 23, The code value of the age clasr~in which you fall?

Q 24. The code value of your present gross family incone?

& 25, How many years of education you have e~n?pleted--excl&%% military schools?

Q 26. The code value of the amount of money you have invested in your camping equipnent? $

Q 27, On the average, what type of cormflu11ity would you say you resided in before the age of 16? Farm Major cities 100,000+ Rural, non-fanm Don't know city - io~ooo- 99,999 Not ascertained Q 28. Where do you now live? (city and state) Q 29, re you married? Yes No Q 30. What is your present occupation? Housewife (GO to question 31)

Unemployed

Retired Q 31. What is your husband's occupation? Interviewer Instruction r ( ) Check if respondent wants a copy of the study results,

THANK RESPOMlEMT AND TEmINATE THE INTERVIEW, APPENDIX C Boater Questionnaire

Interviewer Instruction; InteHew the person in the returning boat who is driving the boat when it is doeking, Fer non-powered boats, interview the head of the group, when it is docking, Interview boaters 18 years of age or older, Introduce yowself as followst

"Good morning (afternoon) sir: I am a graduate student at the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse, New York, I aa conducting a study of boater opinions concerning recreation m-etnent problems on the Allegheny Reservoir, The study will pravide =nagere with the infomation they need to hprove the recnertion service for people like yourself, You have been randomly selected from among the returning boaters to express your opinions concerning resemir mnagenent policies, I know that you are in a hurry now and could not spend rauch the talking to me, so I have prepared a brllief mail- back questionnaire for you to fill out at your leisure, A postage paid return envelope is provided for your convenience,"

Interviewer fill in this infomation: Questionnaire Identification Nuraberr Sex of Respondent: ED ElF Race of Respondent: 0 white n Black

Use Intensity Esthate: Name and Address t Parking Lot t IZJ FUT

1/4 -1 ox less Intemrfewert List : Estfrmzted Respondent -Sex Age Weather I Water Condition:

Date a

Launch Site Nme :

Saraipling Ratio t Questionnaire Identif No.

Q 1. What kind of boat do you own? Type: (Check) : Power Non-Power Length Horsepower

Q 2. How many years have you been boating (anywhere)? (years)

Q 3. How many years have you been boating on the Alleshenv Reservoir? (years)

Q 4. How many days did you boat on the Allegheny Reservoir last year? (days)

Q 5. How long were you on the water the day you received the questionnaire? (hours: Q 6. Mat water activities did you participate in the day you received this questionnaire and where on the Reservoir did you participate in these activities?

Activity Area of Reservoir

Q 7. What places on the Allegheny National Forest did you visit the day you received this questionnaire and what activities, other than boating, did you participate in?

Places Activity

Q 8. For the trip when you received this questionnaire, how many days did you spend on the Allegheny? (days)

Q 9. Please list any conservation groups, outdoor clubs, or any other organized recreation groups in which you have a membership.

Gkou~Memberships

"As a typical boater on the Allegheny Reservoir, we are interested in how you feel about management of the Reservoir". Q 10. a. Is there anything about the management of the Reservoir or facilities available that you would like to see changed?

b. Mat, if anything, do you feel recreation managers should do to alleviate these problems? Q 11. From your boating experience on the Reservoir, would you say that any of the follow- ing four conditions exist? (Check how you feel along the scale provided),

Problem or

2, Overcrowding tl fl 3. Conflicting uses (boating versus u a fishinq, etc,) 4. Lack of enforcing rules and resulations 0 0

Q 12. What is your impression of the use-intensity of the Reservoir? (Check) : 0 Greatly overused 0 Slightly underused 0Slightly overused C] Greatly underused Neither overused or underused No opinion "In order to improve your recreation experience, managers have considered several management proposals, We would be interested in your redctions to these proposals."

9 13. a. Some recreation managers would like to see the Allegheny Reservoir completely free of user zones, that is, areas designated for power boating, fishing, water skiing, etc. Others have suggested that user zones may reduce crowding and improve safety, How do you feel? (Check one) : a Disagree with zoning for users 17 Neutral Agree with user zones

b. Whjj do you feel this way?

Q 14, Some recreation managers feel that launching a boat on the Reservoir should be free. Others suggest that a fee, more in line with that charged at commercial facilities, would insure that more money could be available for proper maintenance and improve- ment of facilities. How do you feel? (Check one): Approve of free launching tJ Neutral a Approve of a launching fee

The question elements for questions 13 through 17 were reversed on half of the questionnaires to reduce the possibility of response bias due to question structure, Q 15. a. Sae boaters feel that the enforcement of rules and regulations tend to restrict their sense of freedm while on the water, Others feel that a reprimand should be given to anyone found causing mnitsry conditions or wilfully endangering other users of the Reservoir. Still others feel that offenses such as these wmtsome form of punishraent, Hmdo pu feel? m Disapprove of either repriaarid or puisbent Approve of repriaLand Approve of punisbent be Why do you feel this way?

c, If you suggest either a reprimand or a punishent, what should be ordered if you were apprehended?

Q 16. a. Some boaters feel that uniformed law enforment officemr regularly patrolling the Reservoir would tend to detract fron their recnsational experience, while others feel that a patrol would be a good idea, How do you feel? [7 DO not want a regular patrol 0 Neutral

Agree with the value of a regular patml be Why do you feel this way?

Q 17. a. Some visitors feel that the natural character of the Reservoir might be ruined with the develolpnent of additional facilities such as marims and more day use areas. Others feel that the Reservoir needs nore of this type of develoyonent. Hrns do you feel? C] Additional facilities are not neeeed. a Neutral [7 Additional facilities are needed

be Why do you feel this way

Q 18. Lo you feel that the number of boaters on the Reservoir the day you received this questionnaire tended to mduce the Reservoir's recreational appeal? n Yes

5 KO opinion We are interested in some personal ixIfomation abut the boaters who me the Allegheny Bservoir. The infomation you provide will be held in strict corfidence, and in no Kay will ever be identified with your response since yous name 6-oes not appear on this questionnaire,

Q 19. Please check the gross family income category in which you fall? 0 Less than $5,000 0 $3,000 to $8,000

0Over $20,000

Q 20. Kow many years of education have ou completed excluding trade schools and military sc~ools? (ye- 3 Q 21. Please check the category corresponding to the mount you have invested in your boating equipment. fl Less than $300

$600 to $1,500 Don't own equipment

Q 22. What size cornunity did you live in before the age of 16? City - 10,000 to 99,999 a City - 100,000 or more city of less than IO;OOO 23, Where do you live now? City State -

Q 24. Are you married? Yes 0 No Q 25. What is your present occupation? (Please be specific)

[7 Please check box if you would like to receive a copy of the study results.

THAhT YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND ASSISTANCE