J Ldepartmentof Agriculturalandappliedeconomics

Staff Papers Series l?82-1 January 1982 RECREATIONAL RESOURCE USE: WHO GAINS? WHO PAYS? The Crow Wing Canoe Trail Case Uel Blank and L.R. Sirncmson j lDepartmentof Agriculturaland AppliedEconomics University of Minnesota Institute of Agriculture, Forcsh-y ttnd Home Economics St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 RECREATIONAL RESOURCE USE: WHO GAINS? WHO PAYS? The Crow Wing Canoe Trail Case by Uel Blank and L.R. Simonson January 1982 Staff Papers are published without formal review within the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics Table of Contents Page Sutmnary i I. Introduction 1 Objectives of the Study 1 The Crow Wing River Environs 2 The Wadena County Economy 4 Research Methodology 5 II. Recreational Users and Their Impact 6 Overall Use and Economic Impact 7 Who Gets Crow Wing River Recreators’ Dollars? 8 Who Uses the Crow Wing River Area for 8 Recreational Purposes? Recreational Activities 10 Attitudes Toward the River’s Natural Features 12 User Problems 13 III. Land Ownership and Resource Management Systems 14 What are the Control Systems? 14 Holdings and Land Use by Private Riparian i6 Land Owners Expenditures by Absentee Property Owners 18 Recreational Activities by Property Owners 19 Problems Reported by Riparian Property Owners 20 Views of Future Uses 22 Ownership Fragmentation 22 IV. Issues in Management of Recreational Resources 23 and Facilities Considerations of Recreational Use Levels 26 Who Pays? What Returns Should Accrue to the 28 Local Community? Who Speaks for Whom? Who Controls? Who Plans 30 for the Area? The Natural Resource Quality: Can it Be Maintained? 32 Management of Recreational Users” Some Are 33 Thoughtless and Inconsiderate i Summary: Recreational Resource Use: Who Gains? Who Pays? Our current society values recreational activities. Opportunities for these recreational activities exist in many rural areas having high amenity features of water, woods and/or terraine. This demand for recreational experiences in the out of doors offers potential for economic return to the local community. It also presents challenges in management and control of the resource. ‘Further, users have both rights and ,responsibilities. All of these factors interact in posing a resource management challenge. The Crow Wing River, in use for nearly two decades a a recreational area, presents an almost classic case of &he opportunities and management challenge. In 1978 a 75 mile segment of the Crow Wing River in North Central Minnesota, provided over 80,000 person-days of recreational use. These recreators spent a total of $305,000 in the area. The recreational use includes 26,000 person-days by local residents. Thus the Crow Wing River is not only an important economic contributor, it is a factor in living quality for local residents. The river is commonly refered to as a canoe trail, but here is eyen more use for other purposes (.picnicing,camping, fishing). The person-day comparisons are: 31,000 canoeingand 35,000 other use. Nine percent of the canoeing and 70 percent of the ‘~other” recreational use is by local residents. In addition there are 7,000 person-days of use by non-resident property owners and 8,000 person-days of sno~~mobileuse. All types of summer recreators emphasize the contribution of high quality natural features to their recreational experience. “Observing nature” ii ranked next to camping and canoeingasa recreational activity. The “natural vegetation” and the “water quality” ranked at the top of features that they liked. Among the major problsms of a recreational resource is that users must be physically present to obtain their recreational experience. This means that they will deteriorate the natural quality of the resource. They compete with other recreational users, some of whom are local residents. If they are thoughtless - and many are - they disturb others, litter, trespass on private property and create acts of vandalism. In addition to these problems, there must be physical access for recreators to use the resource. Provision of this access requires expenditures by the local community and/or resource managing agency. Another facet of visitor use is the economic opportunity. Most tourism economic return is generated from sales by private businesses. But the “sales offering” must be adequate in size, otherwise visitors will simply not be able to spend at an acceptable level. This sales offering may include not only outfitting, but food services, crafts and community events. Many rural communities do not present an adequate array of such goods and services for sale. As a recreational resource develops, ownership patterns change. High amenity areas are sought out by private owners as sites for recreational property and rural residences. Proliferation of these ownership types poses yet another problem in management of the area’s natural qualities. The interplay of the above factors create questions about the area: --- who manages and controls? --- who benefits? --- who pays? RECREATIONAL RESOURCE USE: WHO GAINS? WHO PAYS? The Crow Wing Canoe Trail Case “ Uel Blank and L.R. Simonsonl’ T.. INTRODUCTION This study iS in follow-up to an earlier study in which the economic impact of the Crow Wing Canoe Trail of Wadena County was evaluated as of *I 1966.L’ The earlier study focused almost altogether upon the economic impact of the river’s development for canoeing purposes. Now, with nearly 20 years of recreational trail history, the current study reviews not only . use and economic impact but also the relationship of the river as a canoe trail to the rest of the community, and to owners and citizens of the area. Included in the study are both resident and non-resident recreational users of all types and also riparian land owners and the way in which they have been affected. This approach recognizes that the first claim on any area is by residents, and land owners. At the same time it recognizes .. ~ that every community and every citizen is a part of a larger society, and that most of the benefits which they enjoy are derived from that larger society. As a result continual balancing is necessary between private local rights and responsibilities, and those of the larger society. Objectives of the Study The objectives of this study were to: 1. Estimate the change in use and economic impact of the Crow Wing Recreation Area on the economy and employment of Wadena County compared with the 1966 study. ~/ The research upon which this report is based was partially supported by a grant from the Economic Research Services, USDA. ~/ Uel Blank is Extension Resource Economist, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics and L.R. Simonson is Extension Specialist, Agricultural Extension Service, University of Minnesota. ~/ Uel Blank and Sterling H. Stipe. “Economic Impact of Crow Wing Canoe Trail, Wadena County,” Minnesota ERS 406. 2 2. Study the interaction between users, resident citizens, and owners, and evaluate the nonmonetary costs to resident citizens. 3. Evaluate the possible impact upon the natural area and its capa- bility for delivering satisfaction to nonresidents as well as resident users in terms of a quality experience. 4. Observe the management of the area for recreational use in order to provide guidelines for improved management of the area, and to supply information for other areas seeking to make similar use of recreational resources. In attempting to achieve these objectives, it is necessary to deal with four basic concepts as follows: 1. Resources, their management and conservation. 2. Ownership and control of resources. 3. Use patterns and social behavioral patterns. 4. Costs and returns; who gains, who pays for use of the resources and for benefits received? The Crow Wing River Environs The physical features and general background of the Crow Wing River have been discussed in some detail in the earlier study,&’this description will not be repeated. However, it appears worthwhile to note the background and quality of the area that is treated. The section of the river intensively studied is an approximately 75 mile length of stream extending from Shell City campsite to where the river leaves Wadena County in Section 32 of Thomastown township. In addition, the section of the Blueberry River extending west from Shell City &/ Blank and Stipe, op. cit. 3 campsite to Highway 71 and the Crow Wing River extending southeast to the highway rest area at Motley ware also included in the study, but less comprehensively. The Crow Wing River has been flowing for a long time, probably 10,000 years, serving as a drainage way for glacial lakes and swamps. It is only in the last 100 years that man’s imprint has altered the scene and left its mark. First loggers and then farmers developed their businesses; the first cut and moved on, the second stayed to clear the land, build their homes and raise their families. The Crow Wing River continued to flow unfettered and used and enjoyed primarily by residents for fishing, trapping, wild rice harvesting and per- sonal enjoyment. It was virtually unknown and relatively inaccessible to the broader world. This began to change in the early 1960’s when local public development groups saw opportunity-to open up the Crow Wing.River. to visitors by developing the area through the provision of accesses, campsites, multi-use trail networks and a modest information/direction system. Private enterprise soon followed with services supplying food and beverages, outfitting and marketing efforts of their own. A few who cam enjoyed the area so much - and found low cost land and riverfront available - that second homes began to develop. In other cases resident citizens, who were employed in the nearby service center communities, enjoyed the amenities and views and built year-around homes. Thus, man’s imprint on the river environs has taken the form that is described here.

Load more