TRACKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLITUDE
A Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Department of Recreation, Parks, and Tourism
Administration
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Recreation Administration
by
Miguel Macias
FALL 2012
© 2012
Miguel Jose Macias
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
TRACKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLITUDE
A Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness
A Project
by
Miguel Macias
Approved by:
______, Committee Chair David Rolloff, Ph.D.
______, Second Reader Greg Shaw, Ph.D.
______Date
iii
Student: Miguel Macias
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the project.
______, Department Chair ______Greg Shaw, Ph.D. Date
Department of Recreation, Parks, and Tourism Administration
iv
Abstract
of
TRACKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLITUDE
A Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness
by
Miguel Macias
Statement of Problem
The purpose of the project is to develop a program to monitor solitude opportunities in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness. The wilderness in question is located in the central
Sierra Nevada mountains approximately sixty miles east of Fresno, California. The
Jennie Lakes Wilderness is managed by the Sequoia National Forest and is surrounded by the Giant Sequoia National Monument and Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park.
The Wilderness Act of 1964 mandated that wilderness areas are to provide opportunities for solitude, but the problem for the Jennie Lakes Wilderness is that there is no clear, consistent objective or plan to evaluate if solitude opportunities are available.
This project will introduce a program to monitor the solitude quality and provide baseline data to determine the current conditions. This project will also present and discuss the planning and development process, including the management of data, for building a solitude monitoring program. Within the project, the encounter monitoring program will v
provide the framework for collecting solitude opportunities data and analyzing the data against standards created specifically for Jennie Lakes Wilderness. The resulting data will offer baseline information for the development of a Wilderness Management
Implementation Plan which will contain management actions that maintain and/or improve solitude opportunities.
The creation of the Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program will require an examination of the present model and framework being used by the Forest Service. The discussion will introduce and integrate the Limits of Acceptable Change model and the
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum, and include a review of the minimum requirements for national and local-level upward reporting. At the heart of the project, there are three parts that make-up the foundation of the program and each is questioned to offer rational for the program. The first will outline the planning elements including the purpose of the
Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum for formulating standards, and a detailed description of the relationship between the opportunity classes and the monitoring areas.
The second part describes the protocol and instruction to monitor the solitude quality along with a tutorial in operating data collection tools, and third is the step-by-step procedure to analyze and store solitude data. These three elements are the essential building blocks in the design of the Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program. The development and implementation of this program would help fulfill the need to meet stewardship goals for Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
Sources of Data
vi
Many sources were referenced for the making of this project. Congressional legislation, U.S. Forest Service General Technical Reports, as well as agency manuals containing policy provided support. A review of existing literature described the factors of solitude within wilderness which also included journal articles describing the connection between spirituality, wilderness, and solitude. Other sources included textbooks, non-fiction wilderness books, and government websites that specialize in wilderness management. Lastly, daily reports in patrol logs from wilderness rangers and personal experience assisting wilderness rangers provided a non-scientific investigation to current trends. All the sources provided valuable information to begin the process of developing a program that monitors for solitude.
Conclusions Reached
This project contains a program to monitor the solitude quality in the Jennie Lakes
Wilderness and details the justification to implement the program. Because a Wilderness
Management Implementation Plan or a solitude monitoring program is not currently in place, and federal legislation and agency policy mandate solitude opportunities in wilderness, this project will reveal the benefits of having a detailed plan to gather baseline solitude encounters data and will urge for the implementation of this program to advance wilderness stewardship for Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
, Committee Chair David Rolloff, Ph.D.
______Date vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Sincere ‘thank you’ to all of those who were involved with this project!
To the CSU Sacramento Recreation, Parks and Tourism Administration
Department, to the Department Chair Dr. Greg Shaw, and especially Dr. David Rolloff for being generous with his time, expertise, advice, and friendship.
To my wife and children who tolerated my determination in achieving my personal goal and who endured my emotional absence during my research and writing. I am so incredibly fortunate and thankful to have a wonderful family.
To the recreation staff at the Hume Lake Ranger District of the Sequoia National
Forest who all project a great passion for taking great care of our planet’s natural treasures. Thanks for the hard and rewarding work.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements ...... viii
List of Tables ...... xi
List of Figures ...... xii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Need for the Project ...... 2
Purpose of the Project ...... 9
Research Question ...... 9
Definition of Key Terms ...... 9
Limitations ...... 12
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ...... 14
Wilderness...... 14
Solitude and Spirituality ...... 16
A Human Benefit of Wilderness ...... 18
3. METHODOLOGY ...... 22
Program Planning and Development ...... 24
Data Management ...... 29
4. PROJECT: TRACKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLITUDE A Wilderness
Encounter Monitoring Program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness ...... 38
PART I: THE PLAN FOR MONITORING SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES ...... 39 ix
Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum ...... 40
Monitoring Areas and Data Collection Events ...... 42
Monitoring Areas and Opportunity Classes ...... 44
Indicators and Measures ...... 54
Standards ...... 57
PART II: THE PROTOCOL FOR MONITORING SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES 59
Jennie Lakes Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Protocol ...... 60
Definitions...... 60
Data Collection Instructions ...... 62
PART III: THE STORAGE AND ANALYSIS OF SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES
DATA ...... 81
Pathfinder Office ...... 82
Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel ...... 83
Data Storage ...... 84
Analysis...... 86
5. SUMMARY ...... 93
Discussion ...... 93
References ...... 97
x
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
1. Threats and attributes of wilderness ...... 2
2. Limits of Acceptable Change model...... 25
3. Monitoring areas, opportunity classes, and data collection events scheduled ...... 42
4. Monitoring event schedule ...... 43
5. Metadata for data collection events ...... 55
6. Trail encounters data collection details ...... 56
7. Campsite encounters data collection details ...... 57
8. Limits of Acceptable Change standards ...... 58
9. Data collection form ...... 77
10. Example of trail encounters data collection monitoring event with analysis ...... 89
11. Probability equation ...... 89
12. Example of probability equation and results ...... 90
13. Example of campsite encounters data collection monitoring event with analysis.... 91
14. Probability equation ...... 91
15. Example of probability equation and results ...... 92
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
1. Wilderness Character definition, quality, question, and indicator chart ...... 27
2. Screenshot of corporate database modules available for wilderness upward
reporting ...... 35
3. Jennie Ellis Lake ...... 38
4. Map of Jennie Lakes Wilderness trails and opportunity classes ...... 41
5. Monitoring area 1- Big Meadows trailhead to Weaver Lake ...... 44
6. Monitoring area 2 - Fox Meadow trailhead to Jennie Ellis Lake ...... 46
7. Monitoring area 3 - Rowell Meadow trailhead to Seville Lake...... 47
8. Monitoring area 4 - Marvin Pass trailhead to Mitchell Peak ...... 49
9. Monitoring area 5 - Rowell Meadow to Jennie Ellis Lake & monitoring areas ...... 51
10. Monitoring area 7 - Stony Creek trailhead to Jennie Lake trail ...... 52
11. Monitoring area 8 - Kanawyer Gap trail & monitoring areas ...... 53
12. Trimble unit ...... 63
13. Backside of Trimble unit ...... 64
14. Trimble unit in Otter Box cover...... 64
15. Backpack setup with Trimble unit and range pole antenna installed ...... 65
16. Close-up of Trimble unit in carrying case ...... 66
17. Backpack set-up on uniformed Forest Service data collector ...... 66
18. Starting the Trimble unit ...... 67
19. Starting TerraSync software ...... 68 xii
20. Ensure satellite reception in Terrasync ...... 68
21. Section menu pull-down in TerraSync ...... 69
22. Create data in TerraSync ...... 69
23. Confirm antenna height in TerraSync ...... 70
24. Data collection screen in TerraSync ...... 70
25. Data collection event screen in TerraSync ...... 71
26. Trail encounters data entry in TerraSync ...... 72
27. Ensure points collections in TerraSync ...... 73
28. Resume/end data collection event screen in Terrasync ...... 73
29. Campsite encounters data entry in TerraSync ...... 74
30. Ensure points collection in TerraSync ...... 75
31. Resume/end data collection event screen in TerraSync ...... 75
32. Pathfinder Office screen ...... 82
33. Stored location of encounters data ...... 85
34. Stored location of scheduled monitoring events ...... 86
35. Exported Pathfinder Office data into Microsoft Access ...... 87
36. Data exported from Microsoft Access into Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and
workbook ...... 88
xiii 1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
The Wilderness Act of 1964 defined wilderness as having “outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation” (The
Wilderness Act, 1964). This statement described one essential and fundamental quality that a wilderness area must provide and, consequently, a characteristic that visitors to wilderness have come to expect when recreating in a designated Wilderness Area
(Hendee & Dawson, 2009). Wilderness Areas were also mandated by this designation to
“preserve the wilderness character…,” however, the Wilderness Act does not prescribe how to measure and manage the four qualities of wilderness character nor provide quantitative measures to analyze these traits (Hass, Driver, Brown, & Lucas, 1987). This project will propose a methodology to measure the quality of solitude in a particular
Wilderness Area in the California Sierra Nevada mountains, and aims to add to the foundation of knowledge in how the presence of wilderness visitors may alter visitor experience of solitude. Because wilderness is mandated by law to make available opportunities for solitude, a Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Protocol will be developed to collect baseline data, including directions for storage and analysis. Subsequently, the data may establish a relationship between the quantities of wilderness travelers to the quality and the opportunity for solitude.
There has been extensive research to the biophysical impacts of wilderness by visitors, and at the same time somewhat limited research to the solitude quality that could impact visitor experiences (Cole D. N., 1997). Therefore, this project will concentrate
2 solely on the quality of solitude in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness. Because of the close proximity to a major metropolitan city of Fresno and within a few hours’ drive of larger population centers in California, and because of the adjacent and more regulated wilderness of Kings Canyon & Sequoia National Park, Jennie Lakes Wilderness is often a highly visited outdoor recreation destination. The size of this wilderness is relatively small at 10,339 acres with two main water body destinations at Jennie Ellis Lake and
Weaver Lake. In view of the size of the wilderness and close proximity to large urban populations, this Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program to study the solitude quality in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness lends itself to be a practical project.
Need for the Project
Part I
There are many factors that can influence and threaten wilderness conditions be it either the internal natural ecosystems processes, external sources migrating into
Wilderness Areas, or from agency regulation and policy. Cole (1996) recognized seven threats that can influence eight wilderness attributes.
Threats Attributes 1. Recreation 1. Air 2. Livestock 2. Aquatic Systems 3. Fire Management 3. Rocks/Landforms 4. Invasive Species 4. Soil 5. Water Projects 5. Vegetation 6. Atmospheric Pollutants 6. Animals 7. Adjacent Lands 7. Cultural Resources 8. Wilderness Experiences Table 1 Threats and Attributes of Wilderness
3
Cole (1996) maintained all the factors are interlinked with one another and no one factor exists in isolation. For instance, all eight wilderness attributes can be influenced by the single threat of recreation to some degree.
The eight wilderness attributes can be assembled into two categories where attributes one through seven are biophysical elements and attribute eight is the social element. This sole social element may appear to be a minor influence to the overall wilderness condition, but conditions can be dictated simply by social use patterns, which consequently will affect the remaining biophysical attributes (White, Hall, & Farrell,
2001). For example, the education plan for the Jennie Lakes Wilderness identified five issues threatening the wilderness resource; (1) campsite selection, (2) campfires, (3) sanitation/human waste, (4) stock use, and (5) invasive plants (Wilderness.net, 2007).
All five of these issues and impacts are intrinsically human-caused.
From the threat perspective, recreation and its associated impacts are formed by individual choice, which is independent to the other six threats. Cole (1996) asserted that all seven wilderness threats appear to have a core of human influence; therefore people may be the main determinant for overall wilderness conditions. Even though people are the main factor, there are various relationships of threats to attributes for each congressionally-designated wilderness that need to be further studied (Hass, Driver,
Brown, & Lucas, 1987; Landres P. , et al., 2009).
In the end, most research concluded that ecological elements were affected by the behavior of wilderness visitors (Gunderson, Barns, Hendricks, & McAvoy, 2000). So accordingly, recreational activities by wilderness visitors can threaten and negatively
4 impact the seven attributes of wilderness, including the wilderness experience, more so than any other threat. Because the Wilderness Act mandated that solitude opportunities should be found in wilderness, developing a program to examine this social threat created by wilderness visitors is an appropriate study and project.
Part II
United States Forest Service (USFS) wilderness managers are guided by many federal laws, directives, policy, and plans. The primary law for wilderness activities is the
Wilderness Act of 1964 which sets precedence over Forest Service Direction, Forest
Service Policy, Forest Land and Resource Management Plans (Forest Plans), and then
Wilderness Management Implementation Plans (Wilderness Plans). Wilderness policy and direction is developed at different levels commencing from legislative processes in
Congressional proceedings and down to National, Regional, and Forest level for implementation. These management directions are broad at the Congressional level and lead to more specific at the Forest level.
The Wilderness Act established the National Wilderness Preservation System
(NWPS) and originally created 9.1 million acres in 54 designated wilderness areas in 13 states. Since 1964, wilderness acres were added annually to NWPS designation to over
109 million acres at present, in 757 wilderness areas in 44 states (Wilderness.net, 2012a).
Among these additions was the California Wilderness Act of 1984 which created
3,097,260 acres of wilderness in California which included the Jennie Lakes Wilderness
(The California Wilderness Act, 1984).
5
Since 1984, Jennie Lakes Wilderness has been managed by the Hume Lake
Ranger District of the Sequoia National Forest. In the absence of a locally specific
Wilderness Plan, the Jennie Lakes Wilderness has been managed by the 1988 Forest Plan which provided non-specific and limited guidelines for managing wilderness character
(Sequoia National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, 1988). In the plan, the goal for wilderness stated that the agency should “provide for wilderness use, protection of the wilderness resource, and reduction of conflict between the uses of wilderness and the values of solitude and naturalness” (p. 4-2). The future conditions as stated in the
Forest Plan is the “emphasis will be to maintain the primitive nature and setting of the wilderness” (p. 4-11). It would follow that the statements from the 1988 Forest Plan are too vague to implement, thereby making effective management difficult for the Jennie
Lakes Wilderness. The Forest Plan then detailed ten guidelines for managing wilderness but with no reference to solitude qualities. The stated goals, anticipated future condition, and guidelines in the Forest Plan can provide some direction to manage wilderness, but not effectively.
USFS directives in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2320.3 provided eleven statements for the management of wilderness (U.S. Forest Service, 2007). A statement related to this project is the direction for the use of information systems where it is permissible to “gather necessary information and carry out research programs in a manner that is compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment.” FSM
2324.42 provided further justification to implement strategies for management concerns.
The manual stated, “Identify wilderness management or national issues that may require
6 research in forest plans,” which gives management the liberty to collect data pertaining to visitor use trends and then to integrate into wilderness management plans.
Forest Service Directives in FSM 2320.2 identified objectives to specifically manage wilderness. The five directives in FSM maintained specific objectives that are relevant for this project, but are still vague. The first and only directive related to this project stated to “protect and perpetuate wilderness character and public values including, but not limited to, opportunities for scientific study, education, solitude, physical and mental challenge and stimulation, inspiration, and primitive recreation experiences.”
Subsequently, the intention of this project is to develop a protocol to study and identify the solitude character in wilderness, thereby partly fulfilling an objective as stated in the
FSM 2320.2.
A common issue in implementing management direction for wilderness is the lack of specificity in the Wilderness Act, in Forest Service Policies and Directives, and in the
Forest Management Plans. Typically, a Wilderness Management Implementation Plan would contain quantitative values with clear objectives, but currently, the Jennie Lakes
Wilderness does not have such a plan. A necessary core component in a Wilderness Plan is the Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) model (Stankey, Cole, Lucas, Petersen, &
Frissell, 1985).
In the Wilderness Act, the words recreation and visitor were included to describe wilderness, to define its purpose and to legitimize wilderness for human use. Stankey and others (1985) maintained that even if recreational opportunities were eliminated from wilderness, outside threats could still alter the wilderness resource. Because impacts and
7 changes to wildernesses are inevitable from both internal and external sources, Stankey and others (1985) contended that managers could determine which changes to the wilderness resource were acceptable by employing the LAC process. The LAC process was to be used by managers to develop and define acceptable changes based on quantifiable standards for wilderness conditions, to select appropriate mitigation if standards were exceeded, and to establish monitoring procedures to evaluate changes in wilderness (Hendee & Dawson, 2009). Because the Jennie Lakes Wilderness does not have standards in place, this project will propose standards for wilderness encounters.
In the report Monitoring Selected Conditions Related to Wilderness Character: A
National Framework (Landres, et al 2005) proposed establishing a framework to monitor wilderness character and to evaluate the changes over time. The intention of the framework was to provide managers a tool to monitor “selected actions and conditions related to wilderness character”. The four qualities established in the framework for monitoring wilderness character are untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, and outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. With an established national framework in place for monitoring wilderness conditions, a
Technical Guide for Monitoring Selected Conditions Related to Wilderness Character
(Technical Guide) was developed by Landres and others (2009) that outlined specific monitoring questions, indicators, and measures to evaluate the four qualities of wilderness. The indicator and measure for the outstanding-opportunities-for-solitude quality was integrated into this project from the Technical Guide and are 1) wilderness
8 visitation, and 2) the number of parties visiting a wilderness during the primary use season.
In 2003, only 18 percent of the 406 Forest Service wildernesses were managed within minimum stewardship levels (Thompson, 2005). Because of these low levels, the
Wilderness Advisory Group recommended to the Forest Service chief, the deputy chief, and the National Leadership Team the 10 Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge
(10YWSC) to raise all Forest Service administered wilderness to minimum standards within 10 years. Within the 10YWSC, there were ten elements developed as a standard of measure that would be used across Forest Service managed wilderness. The goal for
Forest Service Wilderness Areas is to achieve a minimum score by year 2014 in time for the 50th anniversary of the Wilderness Act. This project could advance the scoring for element five of 10YWSC which reads, “This Wilderness has adequate direction, monitoring, and management actions to protect opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined type of recreation.”
The first-step in this project was to incorporate the LAC model into the planning and development phase, and then begin to formulate a protocol to collect baseline encounter data and utilize portions of the national guidelines for monitoring solitude conditions. Likewise, the objective of this project was to develop a tool to collect data and measure the solitude quality of Jennie Lakes Wilderness. Currently, there is no tool or standard in place to collect, store, or analyze collected data with regards to outstanding opportunities for solitude. This Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program would fulfill this need.
9
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this project is to develop a Wilderness Encounter Monitoring
Program for a wilderness in the absence of established LAC standards or a Wilderness
Plan, and to establish baseline standards for the solitude quality. The program will consist of procedures to collect, store, and analyze baseline wilderness visitor use data from wilderness and non-wilderness trails1 and campsite locations within wilderness.
The protocol will define the procedures to collect data pertaining to the solitude quality of
Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
Research Question
This program will attempt to answer the following questions by collecting data on the established trail system by sight and sound, and at established campsite locations by sight and sound.
1. What are the trends in outstanding opportunities for solitude?
2. What are possible baseline standards for solitude opportunities in Jennie Lakes
Wilderness?
3. What are the current conditions for solitude opportunities in Jennie Lakes
Wilderness?
Definition of Key Terms
10 Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge (10YWSC): The goal of the 10-Year
Wilderness Challenge is to bring every one of the more than 400 wildernesses under the
USDA Forest Service’s care to a minimum stewardship level by 2014, the 50th
1 For example, trails from the trailhead parking lot to the wilderness boundary are often several miles long.
10
Anniversary of the Wilderness Act. The 10-Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge defines a new level of accountability for Forest Service Wilderness Stewardship (U.S.
Forest Service, 2012).
Data: A representation of facts or concepts in an organized manner in order that it may be stored, communicated, interpreted, or processed by automated means (Wilderness.net,
2012b).
Data Collection Protocol: The documentation of a standardized approach to field data collection aimed at meeting a specific information need. A data collection protocol typically prescribes the methods used to collect data, identifies standard field definitions and codes, and addresses data quality assurance procedures. The protocol is written in enough detail that someone unfamiliar with the procedure could repeat the process
(Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Data Dictionary: A collection of parameters that define how data are collected and stored
(Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Data Collection Protocol: The documentation of a standardized approach to field data collection aimed at meeting a specific information need. A data collection protocol typically prescribes the methods used to collect data identifies standard field definitions and codes; and addresses data quality assurance procedures. The protocol is written in enough detail that someone unfamiliar with the procedure could repeat the process
(Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Global Positioning System (GPS): A navigational system involving satellites and computers that can determine the latitude and longitude of location by computing the
11 time difference for signals from different satellites to reach the receiver (Wilderness.net,
2012b).
Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC): A framework for establishing acceptable and appropriate resource and social conditions in recreation settings (Stankey, Cole, Lucas,
Petersen, & Frissell, 1985).
Monitoring: A systematic process of collecting information to evaluate changes in actions, conditions, and relationships over time and space relative to a predetermined standard or expected norm (Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Metadata: Information or documentation describing spatial data. Meta-data may either be included as part of the tabular data or in a separate data dictionary (Wilderness.net,
2012b).
Natural Resource Manager (NRM): A national Forest Service organization that is responsible for coordinating software development activities for four application groups whose data are accessible through the I-Web platform at the Enterprise Data Center
(EDC): Infra, Natural Resource Information System (NRIS), Timber Information
Manager (TIM), and Forest Service Activity Tracking System (FACTS) (Wilderness.net,
2012b).
Protocol: A documented set of rules or instructions pertaining to the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data or information (Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Standards: Criteria for desirable or tolerable conditions, or a statement or demonstration representing conditions of a job done properly. Standards show how well something should be done, rather than what should be done (Wilderness.net, 2012b).
12
Technical Guide: The documentation for established resource inventory and monitoring methods and terminology that tier off the Forest Service Handbook (Wilderness.net,
2012b).
Wilderness Character: The combination of biophysical, experiential, and symbolic qualities that distinguishes wilderness from all other lands (Wilderness.net, 2008).
Wilderness Information Management Steering Team (WIMST): The Wilderness
Information Management Steering Team is to provide support and guidance on information management activities in the wilderness program at both strategic and tactical levels. The ultimate goal of the team’s work is to improve wilderness conditions and to inform wilderness stewardship decisions by providing line officers and staff with sufficient information, of acceptable quality and in the appropriate format, to support those sound decisions (U.S. Forest Service, 2006).
Limitations
A limitation to this project includes a limit on analysis of the data because of the lack of specific standards set forth in the Sequoia National Forest Management Plan.
Because Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) standards do not exist for the Jennie Lakes
Wilderness, data analysis comparison would be conducted according to hypothetical standards set forth in this project.
A limitation of the monitoring program proposed in this project is that it has been designed exclusively for the Jennie Lakes Wilderness and may not necessarily applicable to another Wilderness Area. Due to the fact that individual wilderness areas have their
13 own unique characteristics the reproduction of this project may be difficult to repeat on another wilderness.
Another limitation of this project is it will collect data primarily through secondary sources and not directly from visitor responses. To reduce the time in requesting permissions to conduct structured person-to-person interviews and mail-in responses, the observation and sound of wilderness visitors will solely be used in data collection efforts. This documentation will not collect names or personal information; rather collect visitor use trends in wilderness. This project could provide an alternate perspective when analyzing the data.
14
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Wilderness
The Wilderness Act was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on
September 3, 1964, creating the National Wilderness Preservation System. The
Wilderness Act established wild and natural areas where humans are visitors and areas untouched by modern civilization. To protect the resources from human development and to secure the naturalness in its current condition, the Wilderness Act mandated that wilderness character of these areas be preserved for future generations and that wilderness character was to perpetuate and freely exist in federally protected sanctuaries.
The Wilderness Act defined wilderness as:
A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works
dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and
its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor
who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this
Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and
influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is
protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1)
generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with
the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding
opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3)
has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make
15
practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may
also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational,
scenic, or historical value. (The Wilderness Act, 1964)
The Wilderness Act mandated for “outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation,” which established recreation pursuits as a legitimate social use of wilderness.
To ensure opportunities for solitude in a wilderness recreation setting could be difficult to accomplish due to the fact that ‘solitude’ is subjective and can be defined with many interpretations, much as ‘wilderness’ has many unique connotation and definitions to people (Hammitt, 1994; Zuefle, 1999). Definitions for both wilderness and solitude appear to have a degree of similarity on the individual level: similarities are composed of subjective values based on an intangible idea. These definitions could be rooted at the subconscious level of an individual and could have been developed from an individual’s personal ‘solitude’ or a ‘wilderness’ experience.
Congressional legislation defined the meaning of wilderness in the Wilderness
Act. Powici (2004) defined the wilderness as, “the place of the wild deer” (p. 75), but a more direct evaluation of the word from Nash (1973) maintains the word ‘wild’ is rooted in ‘will’, meaning “self-willed, willful, or uncontrollable” and the suffix of ‘–ness’ in
‘wilderness’ suggesting an emotional response that “produces a mood or feeling” (p. 1).
Kaye (2006) further suggested wilderness experiences could elicit emotional responses which could contribute to personal growth and enhance self-esteem. Ashley (2007) provided a definition stating that “qualities of wilderness are naturalness or primitiveness
16 and remoteness” (p. 59). Hocking (1995) defined wilderness to have “a natural, unspoilt
(sic) area” (p. 59), while a common view of wilderness as pristine and untouched land is impossible because there is no place that has not been untouched (Watson, 2004). And in a study by Farber and Hall (2007), wilderness visitors provided six categorically unique responses to define wilderness with most common descriptor being “lack of physical modifications and [the] presence of natural features” and 13% total respondents specifically “mentioned the terms of solitude or isolation.”
A common argument found in the literature is the word ‘wilderness’ is difficult to define. Wilderness to one person could mean something completely different to another.
In the end, the definition of the word appears to be subjectively manifested in the thoughts, emotions, and experiences of an individual.
Solitude and Spirituality
There is much discussion over the definition of ‘wilderness’, but most interesting is how the wilderness idea and a wilderness environment generate emotional responses which are then interpreted by an individual. These emotional responses seem to be formed by intrinsic values at the subconscious level, and seem to be closely associated with spirituality and how one perceives the world around them. Wilderness environments, along with the wilderness idea, also seem most conducive to elevate solitude experiences. It seems the concept of solitude is also stimulated by a person’s philosophical values placed upon their surrounding environment and then ultimately forming an emotional response.
17
Because opportunities for wilderness solitude are mandated by the Wilderness
Act, opportunities for seclusion and isolation must be made available for visitors. But what exactly is solitude? Webster’s II New Riverside Dictionary (McCawley, 1996) defined solitude as “the state of being alone, isolation” and “a secluded or lonely place”
(p. 645). According to Hammitt (1994) solitude is defined as an “escape or complete isolation from all other people” (p. 227). The description of privacy was similar to solitude who defined privacy as “the claim of individuals, groups, or institutions to determine for themselves when, how, and to what extent information about them is communicated to others” (Westin as cited in Hammit, 1994, p. 227). Accordingly,
Webster’s II New Riverside Dictionary (McCawley, 1996) defined privacy as “seclusion or isolation from others” and “secrecy” (p. 545). Hendee and Dawson (2009) stated the idea of solitude in wilderness is not complete isolation, but simply a separation from others. Furthermore, the notion of solitude and the sense of privacy could allow for individual self-reflection, transcendent spiritual nourishment, and a higher state of emotion (Kaye, 2006; Johnson, 2002; Zuefle, 1999).
There is much research and literature to support that wilderness produces an emotional response that helps to transcends people’s spiritual attachments with nature.
Because spirituality could create a personal and emotional response, there is no one clear definition. Similar to solitude and wilderness, spiritual meanings and connotations are often personal for every individual and could have many definitions. The root word for spirituality came from the Latin word spiritus meaning “breath of life” (Heintzman,
2003). Another operational definition is “…a search for a reason for one’s existence; a
18
‘greater’ or ‘ultimate’ reality, or a…connection with God, nature…” (Zuefle, 1999).
These explanations of spirituality are in contrast with the definition of religion where it is
“a group experience with accepted beliefs and traditions” (p. 28). On one hand, spirituality is commonly achieved through a transcendental experience within the self and with nature (Heintzman, 2003), and on the other hand religion has often asserted a view of nature, and the self, as “inferior to humanity and subject to human dominion” (Zuefle,
1999, p. 29). In contrast, Strohl (2001) maintained there is no distinct difference among religion and spirituality.
A Human Benefit of Wilderness
The common natural features that elicit an emotional and spiritual response are often from geological landforms, like mountains, rivers, trees, and oceans (Ashley, 2007;
Farber and Hall, 2007). Fox (1999) suggested wild areas provide visual pleasure and fascination and promote transcendent states. According to McDonald, Guldin, &
Wetherhill (1989), the aesthetic quality of nature invokes a spiritual response which then elicits an emotional attachment to place (as cited in Ashley, 2007). Apparently, when the senses are immersed in the natural environment, a person is absorbed into nature and can transcend into a state of spirituality.
The view that spirituality as an integral part of wilderness is common in much of the literature. In fact, researchers have noted the connection between wilderness and spirituality in their respective studies. For example, researchers in Canada’s Prince
Albert National Park found that 45 percent of wilderness travelers stated that the motivation to visit the backcountry was for spiritual reflection. In another quantitative
19 study in California’s Desolation found that 69 percent of respondents related wilderness with spirituality (Heintzman, 2003). Zuefle (1999) also recognized that spiritual connections were not only for wilderness visitors, but also with professionals in the field of outdoor recreation who also reported a high response of spirituality within wilderness settings.
Qualitative studies also provide support to the connection between wilderness and spirituality (Ashley, 2007). Because qualitative research aims to understand human behavior through personal reflection rather than actual physical data as in quantitative research, Farber and Hall (2007), and Pan and Ryan (2007) relied on individual accounts of a wilderness experience, and came to similar conclusions. In a study on wilderness experiences in Alaska, Farber and Hall (2007) noted that “mountains were most often mentioned” (p. 256). A 22 year-old woman wrote:
One of the most special experiences for me was driving through the Brooks
Range. I have never seen anywhere so beautiful. The feeling I had was hard
to describe but definitely powerful. All the mountains were truly amazing (p.
256).
A 24 year-old man wrote:
Lying in the tundra, feeling the clouds on top of the world; the sun never
setting; bees and flowers dancing at 3:00 in the morning; looking at the
ground for hours; getting wet and freezing; lying below the wind; the
overwhelming awe and enchantment (p. 258).
20
In another qualitative study in New Zealand’s Pirongia Forest Park, Pan and Ryan (2007) received a response from a woman visitor who wrote:
When I stop and listen with my heart, I feel I am part of the forest, I can feel
the breathing of the forest. It’s just like a runaway child coming back home.
She [the forest] is always there for me and ready to give me a hug (p. 296).
These emotional responses support the common and reoccurring theme of spirituality in a natural setting.
For participants in the previous qualitative studies, the risk of participating in an outdoor activity was minimal, but Johnston (1992) suggested that risk also can play an important factor in wilderness experience. He further explained it is not necessarily the danger that enhanced the activity, but the challenge surrounding the danger that cultivated a positive experience. Even if there was perceived danger as in extreme mountaineering, spirituality was still evident in high adventure activities. Creyer, Ross, and Evers (2003) suggested that a high-risk activity may be enjoyable, “or even spiritually moving experience for many…” (p. 242), and Beedie (2003) supported that participants in this type of “education… are engaged in developmental leisure, which is a form of adventure education” (p. 164). Beedie (2003) continued that these types of lessons are informal and not necessarily inside a classroom, “but the mountains do become a classroom” (p. 161) to educate about natural settings. Kaye (2006) asserted spiritual orientation in wilderness can also be healthy in the form of less stress and depression, and increased states of satisfaction, optimism, and purpose for life.
21
The connection between wilderness and spirituality is clear: a wilderness setting and spirituality can be interconnected and personally beneficial. But a thought-provoking question emerged from the literature, what exactly is wilderness spirituality? Discussed by Ashley (2007), a theoretical framework of wilderness spirituality has emerged and become recognized “within public lands, national parks, and wilderness management process” (p. 54). In light of the benefits associated with wilderness spirituality, land managers were still hesitant to mention the connection of spirituality and wilderness because of the connotations of the word “spiritual” (Kaye, 2006).
22
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
To develop a protocol for monitoring the solitude quality of Jennie Lakes
Wilderness, sources of information included Forest Service General Technical Reports and research papers, as well as journal articles, wilderness information websites, and books on the subject. In addition to written documents and reports, field observations of visitor use trends were utilized in the development of the Wilderness Encounters
Monitoring Program. As noted in the literature review, previous wilderness research examined attributes of wilderness experience, such as solitude (Farber & Hall, 2007; Pan
& Ryan, 2007; Zuefle, 1999) and spiritual benefits associated with wilderness solitude
(Hammitt, 1994; Ashley, 2007), the role of wilderness recreation towards improving physical and mental health (Zuefle, 1999; Heintzman, 2003), and of the quality of the wilderness resource as a human benefit as it pertains to improved personal well-being have been discussed (Kaye, 2006; Johnson, 2002).
Because attributes for each wilderness area are unique, there were challenges in comparing and incorporating existing monitoring programs for Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
This project will attempt to illustrate the benefits of having a plan for monitoring the solitude quality of Jennie Lakes Wilderness, incorporating procedures from established monitoring programs. Considering there is no solitude monitoring program in place, this project will also establish baseline measures of solitude opportunities, thereby establishing a foundation for future data collection and analysis efforts.
23
The location of this project is on the Hume Lake Ranger District in the Sequoia
National Forest in central California’s Sierra Nevada mountains. The Jennie Lakes
Wilderness has five designated trailheads, five trail portions outside of wilderness, five major trails crossing inside wilderness, and four trails crossing management agency boundary with Sequoia National Park for a total of approximately 26 miles. Two of the five trails cross another and provide the opportunity for an approximate 20 mile loop passing two of the three high visitor-use areas. The primary overnight and day use destinations for wilderness travelers and backcountry stays are near Jennie Ellis Lake,
Weaver Lake, and Rowell Meadow, and three small un-named ponds. This program would support the need to understand visitor use trends by analyzing data collected along these popular travel routes and known wilderness campsites.
In addition to a need for developing a monitoring plan to understand solitude opportunities, the district Recreation Officer and the District Ranger fully support the project and are prepared to field test the program for the Jennie Lakes Wilderness. The collective goal of the wilderness recreation staff is to protect and preserve wilderness character and to maintain the integrity of the wilderness resource. With discussions and recommendations from the wilderness recreation staff, the Recreation Officer provided input to the development of the project, including locating and reassigning financial resources and identifying potential obstacles.
There are two goals for creating a program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness. The first is to develop a protocol to monitor the solitude quality, and the second is to provide baseline datasets to formulate prescriptions to sustain solitude opportunities. This project
24 will highlight the planning process of program development including the collection, storage, and analysis of the data pertaining to the solitude quality of wilderness character.
Additionally, protocols and standards will be developed for the program to collect wilderness encounters data in the field. Ultimately, the products of these goals will be used for developing a Jennie Lakes Wilderness Management Implementation Plan.
Program Planning and Development
Limits of Acceptable Change
The existing Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) model was the foundation for developing the standards for monitoring the solitude quality of wilderness. The Technical
Guide for which established national standards for monitoring was referenced in conjunction with the LAC model.
The LAC model has been used extensively by many Forest Service units and understood to be a practical and reasonable approach for developing standards, as opposed to the Carrying Capacity model which was reformulated into the LAC model.
This earlier model was determined to be ineffective mostly because it was based on a resource area’s recreational saturation point (Hendee & Dawson, 2009). The analysis
“considered the carrying capacity of an area [to have] an inherent value” and are based on
“value judgments as well as science” (p. 221). This model was “derived from social and ecological judgments about appropriate wilderness conditions” (p. 222). In time, this model evolved into the LAC model which considers the influences of these judgments.
The LAC model has been used by Forest Service wilderness managers to manage the wilderness resource and has been recognized as an effective tool in defining acceptable
25 limits and developing management actions. The ten-step LAC process was integrated into the development of this program:
Limits of Acceptable Change Model 1. Define goals and desired conditions 2. Identify area issues and concerns 3. Define and describe opportunity classes 4. Select indicators of resource and social conditions 5. Inventory existing resource and social condition. 6. Specify standards for resource and social indicators for each opportunity class 7. Identify alternative opportunity class allocations 8. Identify management actions for each alternative 9. Evaluate and select preferred alternative 10. Implement actions and monitor conditions
Table 2 Limits of Acceptable Change Model
Since no local LAC standards or protocols exist for Jennie Lakes Wilderness, nor was a wilderness plan in place, the LAC process was used by managers to develop hypothetical opportunity classes, indicators, and standards for data analysis. Because this project’s intent was to develop and test a program for possible future use, and to establish baseline solitude data, public involvement was minimal. However, it is reasonable to consider that this proposed program could be incorporated into a developing wilderness plan in the future where public involvement would be required.
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)
The ROS was reviewed to distinguish zones according to its setting. The recreation settings are a “combination of physical, biological, social, and managerial conditions that give value to a place” (Clark & Stankey, 1979, p. 1). In step three
(establishing hypothetical opportunity classes or zones) of the LAC process, the ROS
26 framework would be used in developing hypothetical opportunity classes. The ROS has six defined classes from undeveloped and primitive to modern and urban. The spectrum classifies opportunities in relation to settings/behaviors and activities/facilities to determine six diverse recreational opportunities and experiences (Clark & Stankey, 1979;
Driver, Brown, Stankey, & Gregoire, 1987; Manning & Lime, 2000).
The Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (WROS) was developed out of the ROS framework to “address increasingly complex wilderness management situations” (Hendee & Dawson, 2009). Four wilderness opportunities classes described by Hendee and Dawson include “finer gradations of primitive and semi-primitive classes” (p. 209). The four classes are pristine, primitive, semi-primitive, and transition.
Because the WROS framework was specifically formulated for wilderness recreation, it was used to assign a classification-type to the monitoring areas in this program. The four classes of WROS provided the zoning prescriptions for Jennie Lakes Wilderness as directed by the LAC process. The Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program written in this project encompassed techniques and strategies defined in the LAC model and the
WROS framework to determine the direction of the monitoring program.
National Minimum Indicator for Solitude Quality Monitoring
The Technical Guide was referenced for this program and included the national indicators and measures for monitoring the solitude quality of wilderness character. This model was incorporated to provide nationally consistent and locally relevant information to improve wilderness stewardship. The preferred indicators and measures identified by the Technical Guide were selected for three reasons: relevance, reliability, and cost-
27 effectiveness. The concept of the Technical Guide is to not compare results or to develop standards, rather to evaluate if the quality, the question, and the indicator are trending over time towards improvement, degradation, or stabilization.
Figure 1 Wilderness Character definition, quality, question, and indicator chart
Because wilderness units are generally administered at the local level, managers determine the extent of information collected in the field. Each wilderness unit manager retains the liberty to determine the range of field data required to meet locally adapted stewardship goals. For instance, managers may require detailed information regarding specific campsites, trail conditions, or other locally relevant issues which are ultimately beyond the scope of the Technical Guide. The Technical Guide depicts the national minimum required for upward reporting.
With regards to the national minimum required information, the focus of this project was to examine only solitude quality. Therefore, the indicator identified in the
Technical Guide to monitor solitude was wilderness visitation trends. It was determined that by noting the amount of recreational wilderness use, whether or not opportunities for
28 solitude are possible would be ascertained. According to Hendee and Dawson (2009), the amount of visitors in wilderness directly relates to the opportunity for solitude in a wilderness setting; therefore, this indicator was determined to be the central predictor for solitude quality in this project.
To measure this indicator, the Technical Guide suggested counting the number of groups encountered rather than individual visitors seen or heard. For Jennie Lakes
Wilderness, this count will be performed on system trails during the high use period or during a time period when there is 80 percent of visitor use.
To measure the indicators of solitude for the national minimum, this project identified one attribute as the data source. The attribute is a self-issued registration card completed by visitors at wilderness trailheads. In the field, wilderness rangers will validate this data when making visitor contacts on the trail, and with their observations of registration cards in possession. Discrepancies of non-compliance will be treated by issuing registration cards to visitors not carrying cards. This attribute would be the main source of information to provide the details needed for upward reporting for the national minimum.
Locally Selected Indicators for Solitude Quality Monitoring
The wilderness visitation indicator for national minimum upward reporting was identified in the Technical Guide, but at the local level supplemental indicators and measures were selected to monitor overall solitude quality. In this project, the indicators and measures selected will provide for the national minimum and at the same time provide detailed and locally relevant information pertaining to the Jennie Lakes
29
Wilderness. The supplemental indicators for measuring solitude quality were trailside encounters and campsite proximity encounters. Monitoring these locally selected indicators would calculate wilderness visitation trends and also supplement the data collected from the trailhead registration cards which are used for the national minimum.
The attributes for the selected indicators will employ visual and audible cues along selected wilderness and non-wilderness trails and at known campsite locations, and documented during data collection. To ensure validity, a clear and consistent protocol for data collection will be in place. If the data collector recalls errors during data entry, the data collector will note the mistake on collection forms and make corrections prior to downloading data.
Data Management
The second planning component for the Wilderness Encounters Monitoring
Program is the management of data. Within this component, there are three elements for program development: collection, storage, and analysis. These three elements are essential factors in fulfilling step five of the LAC process with regards to conducting inventory.
Data Collection
Data collectors require precise protocols in place to collect information in a uniform manner for consistent data collection and to create valid datasets, as well as for accurate data analysis. Data collectors need to be consistently trained in field procedures so information is entered accurately. The protocol in chapter 4, part II will direct all functions for collecting data in the field.
30
Data collection not only requires clearly-written protocols, but also reliable tools to document encounters in the field. For example, reliability in this instance occurs when various rangers in the field collect data in the same manner. The primary data collection instrument will be a Trimble Juno SB field computer. The Trimble unit features
TerraSync software for quick, efficient Global Information Systems (GIS) data collection. The first advantage of the Trimble unit for data collection is the integrated field computer which allows for seamless data uploads/downloads to Pathfinder Office software. Other features include a customizable data dictionary which can be programmed to identify selected indicators, a high-sensitivity global position system
(GPS) receiver, a built-in three megapixel camera, and an overall rugged design for outdoor environments. Field computers provide an advantage over traditional pen-and- paper format in reduced errors associated with interpreting and transferring data to an electronic format.
Even though it is not the preferred method, the secondary collection tool will be traditional pen-and-paper forms to record data and will occur at some sites due to environmental factors and battery-life technologies. Data entry will be completed by lead wilderness staff using appropriate spreadsheets on a daily basis. To ensure a level of accuracy, daily audits of paper forms will be conducted to reveal possible errors and discrepancies with the data entry process. Electronic data will be the responsibility of the wilderness manager to upload to personal-computer (PC) for subsequent storage and analysis.
31
Data sampling strategies. According to Broom and Hall (n.d.), three sampling strategies are available for collecting trailside encounters and campsite proximity encounters. The random selection strategy was the preferred method and will be used for this project. This technique creates less bias in the results but is more difficult to implement because it demands collection on pre-set dates. To overcome this obstacle, non-uniformed wilderness rangers and volunteers travelling at the pace of a typical visitor will be recruited to perform collection duties
A second strategy discussed in Broom and Hall was convenience sampling, which would allow field staff to continue their work duties and at the same time allow for the collection of encounters data, but the noted that this approach created bias “towards certain locations or time of days, week or season” (p. 16). The third strategy was purposive sampling where data is collected in accordance to a desired outcome in the results. This method would not be a valid method for this project because one goal of this project is to collect baseline data. The inherent bias of this method would skew results and not provide true conditions. Broom and Hall stated this method was preferred for a low use wilderness, and they reasoned that if a known high use area was monitored and found within standards, then the remaining wilderness more than likely was within standards. These two latter strategies would not be incorporated into this program.
Data collection technique. Broom and Hall (n.d.) also identified three techniques to collect encounter data. The preferred method (incorporated into this program) was the indirect technique, where a trained observer simulates the travel pattern of visitors and collects encounters data.
32
The second method was the direct technique, where a trained observer followed a group and collected encounters data made by the group. Broom and Hall stated there were a few disadvantages to this technique, such as the inability to control visitor travel, the negative impacts to the observed group’s experience when they recognized an observer nearby. As well, this method can become cost prohibitive due to the requirements of an adequate amount of staff dedicated to collecting sufficient samples.
The third technique described by Broom and Hall was called perceived encounters, where information is reported by visitors through interviews and surveys.
This approach reflects the most accurate perception of visitor solitude opportunities because the visitors would provide details of their observations from memory, rather than a trained observer sensing and documenting all encounters. According to Broom and
Hall this approach was most difficult to implement administratively.
Spatial boundaries. Trails and trail corridors will be classified into opportunity classes and monitored with the Trimble unit to collect visitor encounter data. The monitoring of the opportunity classes will note the data collection event and the trail encounter details from visual and audible cues. This information will be electronically stored on the Trimble unit until downloaded into the Pathfinder Office program.
Known campsite locations have been determined from recent campsite scouting efforts and this will simplify the data collection process of locating campsite destinations in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness. As part of the campsite impact monitoring efforts for locating possible campsite locations, global information systems (GIS) software was used to scan the nearby trail system with aerial photography. Observations through this
33 method revealed likely campsite locations near water that may attract overnight campers in search of a solitude opportunity with a water source. These areas were previously unknown to wilderness managers; therefore, most backcountry travelers may not have been aware of these areas as well. The conscientious effort in locating a solitude location may encourage wilderness visitors to venture into these less-visited areas. These identified campsites are in general regions of the wilderness and would be classified into opportunity classes with the trail corridors. Data collection within these opportunity classes would use the Trimble unit with its data dictionary function for collecting campsite encounter details.
Collectively, the spatial boundaries will monitor the areas as trail corridors, trail corridors and campsites, and campsites only. All monitoring areas will be classified into specific opportunity class according to its historical visitor use. The areas that have the lowest visitor use or classified as pristine will not be monitored, while the other three opportunity classes will be monitored accordingly.
Temporal boundaries. The most visited time in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness typically begins on the Memorial Day holiday weekend and continues to the Labor holiday weekend for a total of 102 days, or 71 weekdays, 28 weekend days, and 3 holidays. Out of these 102 days, there are minimum monitoring days for upward reporting to meet corporate requirements and to reach the goals of the 10 Year
Wilderness Stewardship Challenge (10YWSC). The Forest Service has developed a draft minimum standard for upward reporting for element 5 of the 10YWSC (Hall, 2012). In
34 order for a wilderness unit to receive a minimum score of four points, temporal data must be completed as follows:
A minimum of 5 weekday and 5 weekend (or holiday) monitoring sessions need
to be collected for each monitoring area.
A minimum of 4 hours per monitoring session must be spent collecting data
within a specified monitoring area. Data collection for traveling encounters must
be done during high-use, daytime hours, generally between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00
p.m., although data for camp encounters may be collected at any time of day.
Data Storage
Data storage requires the safe-keeping of collected data in multiple locations to ensure the security and integrity of subsequent data analysis. The back-up for encounters data would use printed-copies of spreadsheets, electronic storage, and the Infra corporate database.
Data collected on paper forms will be electronically recorded into the appropriate spreadsheets and workbook for eventual analysis and long-term storage. These paper forms will also be electronically scanned and stored on PC. The terminus of any paper forms used will be filed in the cabinet titled Data Collection Forms.
The primary tool for collecting data would be through use of a Trimble Juno SB unit. The unit can store multiple days of field data collection within a 4 gigabyte memory card until ready for upload to PC. The unit will be returned to the wilderness manager on a daily basis to download field data and undergo an audit to ensure its quality and
35 accuracy. The TerraSync software loaded in the Trimble unit will be the interface for collecting encounters data in the field. Utilizing a USB port connection, the unit would connect to a PC for data transfer and through Microsoft ActiveSync for synchronization of the systems. Pathfinder Office software loaded on the PC is the interface for managing the functions of the TerraSync software in the Trimble unit. A Pathfinder Office utility incorporates a data transfer function to download and store data onto the PC for subsequent analysis. The data on the Trimble Juno TerraSync program can then be deleted from the Trimble unit’s memory.
The third possible storage location would be in the Infra corporate database utilizing the I-web interface located on the Forest Service Natural Resource Manager
(NRM) Intranet website. On the NRM dashboard, the main menu portlet contains several folders including wilderness. Within the wilderness folder, there are four applications.
The wilderness recreation monitoring application contains four tools titled forms, maps, reports, and user views. The forms tool contains six modules.
Figure 2 Screenshot of corporate database modules available for wilderness upward reporting
36
The wilderness trail encounter monitoring module requires all data to be manually entered into the database for each data collection event. Unfortunately, the Forest
Service Wilderness Information Management Steering Team (WIMST) advised that this particular module has not received recent updates, and is therefore out-of-date. This further suggests the storage of data in this database may not be advisable at this time.
When the time comes to integrate the corporate database into the storage procedures for encounters monitoring, it would be highly prudent to do so. Data should be maintained in a secure location indefinitely and the data inputted at this level would permit corporate managers to make informed decisions regarding wilderness.
Data Analysis
The final element is the analysis of data and report generation for decision making at the local levels and for informing interested parties. In step six of the LAC process and for this project, hypothetical standards for each opportunity class will be developed prior to data analysis. The purpose of the analysis is to conclude if the results found in the data are meeting the standards set forth in the LAC process. The analysis will compile the data and identify an association and comparison between solitude opportunities and the
LAC standards. A detailed analysis will compare trail encounters and the campsite encounters according to its assigned opportunity class. The results should provide insight and identify if specific areas and opportunity classes are within standards.
After a daily monitoring event is completed in a monitoring area with the Trimble
Juno SB unit, the unit will be returned so data can be downloaded and inspected for data entry errors. Prior to the differential correction process that increases the location
37 accuracy, this data will be scrutinized for data clarity and then exported to Microsoft
Access. The data will then be streamlined for output into Microsoft Excel for generating reports and charts.
The reporting products will include Pathfinder Office maps depicting actual locations where the visitor encounters occurred. The data collected on the Trimble unit will provide a visual representation to interested parties in identifying exact locations of encounters. The monitoring event data in the form of a data collection event, the trail encounter and the campsite encounter details will be exported to Microsoft Access and
Excel to develop spreadsheets, charts and graphs to summarize the data in formats that are quantifiable. The analysis of data will include daily and seasonal charts and graphs to depict wilderness use trends on a micro and macro levels.
The detailed trail encounter data will be analyzed by determining the level of groups encountered per eight hour standard day according to the opportunity class of the trail at hand. The result will be compared to the hypothetical standard assigned in this project, thereby giving an indication if solitude opportunities are available while on a trail-corridor. The detailed campsite encounters data will be analyzed by way of calculating the amount of occupied campsites in sight and sound of other occupied campsites. This result will also be compared to hypothetical standards developed in this project to determine if opportunities for solitude can be found in campsite locations.
38
Chapter 4
TRACKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLITUDE
A Wilderness Encounter Monitoring Program for Jennie Lakes Wilderness
Figure 3 Jennie Ellis Lake
39
PART I:
THE PLAN FOR MONITORING SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES
40
Wilderness Recreation Opportunity Spectrum
The trails and campsites of the Jennie Lakes Wilderness were assigned opportunity classes (OC) in reference to current use patterns. Because there is no
Wilderness Management Implementation Plan in place to direct the assignment of OC, referring to the Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) model and the Wilderness
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (WROS) provided direction in assigning OC to the trails and campsites in Jennie Lakes Wilderness. There are four OC in Jennie Lakes
Wilderness and three will be monitored for solitude opportunities. The four opportunity classes are:
OCI (Pristine). This area is characterized as an extensive, unmodified, natural environment. Natural processes and conditions have not been measurably affected by the actions of users. The area will be managed as free as possible from the influences of human activity. Terrain and vegetation allow extensive and challenging cross-country travel.
OCII (Primitive). The area is characterized by an essentially unmodified, natural environment. Concentrations of visitors are low and evidence of human use is minimal.
The area has high opportunity for isolation, solitude, exploration, risk, and challenge.
OCIII (Semi-Primitive). The area is characterized by a predominantly unmodified environment of at least moderate size. System trails and campsites are present and there is evidence of other uses. A minimum of on-site controls and restrictions are implemented to protect physical, biological, and social resources. Some facilities may be present to reduce visitor impact.
41
OCIV (Transition). The area is characterized by a predominantly unmodified environment; however, the concentrations of visitors may be moderate to high at various times. The area is characterized as having a large number of day users who are often mixed with overnight and long-distance travelers on trails near trailheads and wilderness boundaries.
The Jennie Lakes Wilderness was assigned opportunity classes according to historical and reported use patterns by wilderness rangers, self-registration forms, and campsite impact surveys.
Figure 4 Map of Jennie Lakes Wilderness trails and opportunity classes
42
Monitoring Areas and Data Collection Events
The designation given to each monitoring area was the best estimate possible to identify if the opportunity for solitude was attainable. Understandably, these designations are hypothetical and were chosen to allow a standardized approach for monitoring the solitude quality. Even so, every attempt was made to be as practical and realistic as possible to the current condition in this wilderness.
For each opportunity class, observations scheduled during the observation period to determine the solitude quality in wilderness. The following is a summary of the monitoring areas.
Mileage Data Collection Monitoring Areas Opportunity Class (approximate) Events
Big Meadows trailhead to 1 IV 3 Weaver Lake 5 weekend days Fox Meadow trailhead to 5 weekdays 2 5.25 Jennie Ellis Lake IV
Rowell Meadow trailhead to 3 III 5.25 SEKI boundary / Seville Lake 5 weekend days Marvin Pass trailhead to 5 weekdays 4 3 Mitchell Peak III
JO Pass trail from Rowell 5 II 3.85 Meadow junction to JO Pass 5 weekend days Weaver Lake trail from cutoff to 5 weekdays 6 5.5 Rowell Meadow trail junction II
Stony Creek trailhead to 7 4 Jennie Lake trail junction II
8 Kanawyer Gap trail section II 0.5 5 weekend days 5 weekdays 9 Marvin Pass trail section II 1
10 Rowell Meadow trail section II 1.25
Table 3 Monitoring areas, opportunity classes, and data collection events scheduled
43
The ten total days collected will be randomly selected for each OC. Random sampling will provide for a realistic view of the solitude quality in Jennie Lakes
Wilderness. To create a schedule of Monitoring Events, a random sample of days were generated during the period of high visitor use for each OC. Next, a random sample of
Monitoring Areas was ordered for each OC. The random days were then matched to the random Monitoring Areas for each OC in the order generated, and finally, the monitoring schedule was finalized. The following table 4 shows the monitoring schedule for year
2013:
OC Weekdays Monitoring Area Weekends Monitoring Area IV 5/28/2013 1 5/26/2013 2 5/29/2013 1 6/29/2013 1 6/19/2013 2 7/28/2013 2 7/5/2013 1 8/3/2013 1 7/10/2013 1 9/1/2013 2 III 5/31/2013 3 6/16/2013 4 6/7/2013 4 6/22/2013 4 7/22/2013 3 7/6/2013 4 7/29/2013 3 7/13/2013 3 7/30/2013 3 8/25/2013 4 II(a) 7/10/2013 6 7/7/2013 6 7/12/2013 5 7/13/2013 6 7/16/2013 5 7/14/2013 5 7/25/2013 5 8/4/2013 6 8/14/2013 5 8/24/2013 5 II(b) 5/29/2013 9 5/25/2013 7 6/7/2013 8 6/16/2013 7 6/12/2013 9 6/23/2013 8 6/26/2013 8 7/13/2013 10 8/20/2013 9 7/14/2013 10
Numbers generated by www.random.org on September 17, 2012
Table 4 Monitoring event schedule
44
Monitoring Areas and Opportunity Classes
A detailed description of the ten Monitoring Areas will be explained, including a brief description of the use patterns and the justification for assigning the opportunity class (OC).
Opportunity Class IV Monitoring Areas
Figure 5 Monitoring Area 1- Big Meadows trailhead to Weaver Lake
There are two trails and two campsites areas in OCIV. Monitoring area one is first and is the most visited area that starts from the Big Meadow trailhead at an elevation of 7,600 feet and arrives at Weaver Lake 8,700 feet elevation. At the trailhead, facilities consist of one vault restroom, three visitor information boards, and parking spaces for 20 vehicles. Around 1,000 feet from the trailhead on the trail is a self-registration kiosk.
45
The Big Meadow trail (29E03) towards Weaver Lake terminates at the junction of the Weaver Lake trail (30E09) and the Jennie Lakes trail (29E05) in 1.75 miles. The
Weaver Lake trail continues for 1 mile to the next trail junction of the Weaver Lake trail cutoff (30E09A). The final 0.25 mile trail ends at Weaver Lake at an elevation of 8,700 feet. From the Big Meadows trailhead to Weaver Lake is approximately 3 miles one way where 2.25 miles of it is outside of wilderness and with an elevation gain of 1,100 feet.
The Fox Meadow trailhead is an undeveloped trailhead with no facilities other than 3 information boards. There is dirt parking to accommodate approximately 12-15 vehicles. The Fox Meadow trail (29E07) is a 0.25 mile trail that junctions the Big
Meadow trail. The trail further enhances accessibility to Weaver Lake by eliminating
1.25 miles off the Big Meadows trail from the 3 one-way miles, thereby making Weaver
Lake a fairly easy 1.75 mile hike from Fox Meadow trailhead.
Because of the relatively gentle elevation gain, minimal trail hiking mileage, fair facilities of visitor information and parking availability makes Weaver Lake an attractive day hike destination as well as an easy overnight pack trip.
This monitoring area has historically received the highest use within the Jennie
Lakes Wilderness from trail reports by wilderness rangers. From the collected campsite impact data, the Weaver Lake area was determined to contain 19 campsites with 9 sites having considerable resource impacts. Therefore, an assignment of OCIV was an appropriate assessment for this area. Even though a considerable portion of the trail is outside wilderness, it was determined to monitor this area as a unit because the common destination is within wilderness.
46
Figure 6 Monitoring Area 2 - Fox Meadow trailhead to Jennie Ellis Lake
The other popular destination on the Jennie Lakes Wilderness is Jennie Ellis Lake from either Fox Meadow trailhead or Big Meadows trailhead. The majority of the Jennie
Lakes trail is in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness and within the scope of this wilderness monitoring program. Monitoring area two begins from the junction of the Big Meadows trail and the Jennie Lakes trail (29E05) at an elevation of 8,200 feet. The trail travels 4.6 miles to arrive at Jennie Ellis Lake at an elevation of 9,000 feet after a peak elevation of
9,200 feet. This destination and travel route, with the addition of the Fox Meadow trailhead access, would be a 5.25 mile one-way hike thereby making it a relatively moderate hiking opportunity for those seeking a backcountry experience.
47
Wilderness ranger reports and campsite impact data has also indicated this monitoring area to have a significantly high use pattern. In one instance on a holiday weekend, wilderness rangers encountered approximately 10 groups in a three hour period in this monitoring area. Campsite impact monitoring efforts also revealed 18 campsites in the Jennie Ellis Lake area with 13 of these sites highly impacted. Because of this high use pattern, OCIV was assigned and was deemed appropriate.
Opportunity Class III Monitoring Areas
Figure 7 Monitoring Area 3 - Rowell Meadow trailhead to Seville Lake
The Rowell Meadow trailhead and Rowell Meadow trail (30E08) receives significantly less use than the prior two destinations and enough estimated visitor use to be assigned OCIII. From wilderness ranger reports and scouting efforts, monitoring area
48 three was determined to be used primarily by wilderness travelers with destinations in
Sequoia Kings Canyon National Park (SEKI). Popular park destinations include Seville
Lake, Lost Lake and Ranger Lake with exits in Sequoia National Park trailheads near the
Lodgepole Visitor Center.
At the Rowell Meadow trailhead, there is one vault toilet, three information boards, one self-registration kiosk, and parking available for up to 20 vehicles including horse trailers. Visitors have the opportunity to camp overnight at one of the two designated and primitive campsites. The trailhead is at an elevation of 7,900 feet and is one mile from the 8,400 foot elevation of the Jennie Lakes Wilderness boundary. In two miles from the trailhead, the first junction for Weaver Lake trail (30E09) is joined.
Continuing on the Rowell Meadow trail for another 0.5 mile, Rowell Meadow and few campsites are observed along the trail and near the four-way junction of Marvin Pass
Trail (30E06) to the left and Seville Lake trail (30E43) to the right. At this junction,
Seville Lake trail is a 3.75 mile trail to the pass and the SEKI boundary with an additional
1.35 miles to a Seville Lake destination. Elevations gains are moderate where the highest point is at the Wilderness/SEKI boundary at 9,200 feet for a total of 5.25 miles. From scouting efforts, wilderness rangers found the ascent to the boundary to be somewhat milder than the ascent into Jennie Ellis Lake on the Jennie Lake trail.
Because of the moderate use as a throughway into the park and the limited campsites in the area, this monitoring area was assigned an OCIII. Other factors that determined the moderate use of the trail were the restrictions the park placed on visitor experience in wilderness. For instance, a $15 dollar permit fee, designated campsites at
49 the popular wilderness lake destinations and overall trail improvements all made these destinations appear to be somewhat in contrast to wilderness objectives. Although, the natural resource conditions including the solitude quality that were experienced during wilderness ranger scouting missions depicted conditions in contrast to the destination areas in Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
Figure 8 Monitoring Area 4 - Marvin Pass trailhead to Mitchell Peak
The other monitoring area assigned OCIII begins at the Marvin Pass trailhead at an elevation of 8,400 feet. The Marvin Pass trailhead for monitoring area four has a large parking area to accommodate up to 20 vehicles and horse trailers. There are no amenities other than three information boards and a self-registration kiosk.
50
The wilderness boundary is located on the Marvin Pass trail (30E06) and at
Marvin Pass in one mile where it junctions with the Kanawyer Gap trail (30E07).
Making a left onto the Kanawyer Gap trail, the trail will lead to the junction of the
Mitchell Peak trail (30E07A) in 0.75 miles. From this junction, the trail is another 1.25 miles to Mitchell Peak at 10,365 feet. Even though the first and last mile of the trail is outside designated wilderness, and because Mitchell Peak is the destination with one known campsite along the trail, it was decided to monitor these trail sections as one unit.
The main reason for assigning this monitoring area an OCIII was because of established day-use pattern to Mitchell Peak for its 360 degree views and limited campsite opportunity.
51
Opportunity Class II Monitoring Areas
Figure 9 Monitoring Area 5 - Rowell Meadow to Jennie Ellis Lake & Monitoring Area 6 - Weaver Lake trail to Rowell Meadow trail
The remaining 5.5 miles of the Weaver Lake trail (30E09), the 2.5 mile JO Pass trail (30E11), and a 1.35 mile portion of the Jennie Lake trail (29E05) were depicted onto one map as OCII, but would be monitored as two separate monitoring areas. Monitoring area five begins at Jennie Ellis Lake and concludes at the junction of Weaver Lake trail.
Monitoring area six is the Weaver Lake trail which begins from the Weaver Lake cutoff trail junction and ends at the junction of the Rowell Meadow trail. These monitoring areas will also include known campsite along and near the trail.
52
OCII was assigned to these monitoring areas by examining visitor use patterns and determining visitors have taken the opportunity to complete the 20 mile loop from
Big Meadow trailhead, but was not necessarily typical. The historical use pattern and the condition of existing campsites and fire-rings indicate some overnight use through this monitoring area is not common; therefore OCII was assigned to these monitoring areas and considered appropriate.
Figure 10 Monitoring Area 7 - Stony Creek trailhead to Jennie Lake trail
The Stony Creek trail (29E06) begins in the Upper Stony Creek campground at an elevation of 6,500 feet. At the trailhead, there is limited parking for five vehicles, three information boards for visitor information, and a self-registration kiosk. The wilderness boundary is located 0.5 miles from the trailhead and begins the ascent to the junction of
53 the Jennie Lakes trail at 9,000 feet in another 3.5 miles for an elevation gain of 2,500 feet. Visitor use on this trail was determined to be low considering the steep and continuous ascent towards Poop-Out Pass at 9,100 feet. Wilderness ranger scouting efforts found very little use; therefore, it was determined to assign monitoring area seven as OCII.
Figure 11 Monitoring Area 8 - Kanawyer Gap trail & Monitoring Area 9 - Marvin Pass trail & Monitoring Area 10 - Rowell Meadow trail
The 1 mile trail section of Marvin Pass trail (30E06), the 1.25 mile section of the
Rowell Meadow trail (30E08), and the 0.5 mile section of the Kanawyer Gap trail
(30E07) was assigned OCII after studying its visitor use patterns. These trail sections historically have seen very little use by visitors due in part that destinations from these
54 trail sections are at significant distances, especially for travelers on trails entering into the
SEKI backcountry. Opportunities for solitude can be found by those venturing another 7 miles from the wilderness boundary to Roaring River in SEKI from the Kanawyer Gap trail or from the Rowell Meadow trail. While the Marvin Pass trail section can be viewed as a type of ‘connector’ trail for those visitors with transportation logistics for one-way travel. The assignment of OCII was decided as appropriate.
Opportunity Class I Areas
OCI are pristine areas where visitors are sure to find solitude opportunities and will therefore not be monitored in this protocol. The areas outside of assigned opportunity classes IV, III, and II will be visited on occasion, but would not be evaluated.
Wilderness rangers may occasionally travel cross-country routes determined from topographic maps that could potentially provide wilderness travelers pursuing solitude an opportunity. While some routes to these areas have been determined and some have timeworn fire-rings with no impacts to surrounding area, the monitoring of these areas would be minimal. Wilderness ranger patrol routes may traverse into these areas for welfare checks on the occasional visitor or during expedient wilderness ranger travels, but documented data collection and monitoring will not be conducted.
Indicators and Measures
In the previous sections, the monitoring schedule and the four opportunity classes
(OC), as well as a detailed description of the 10 Monitoring Areas, were explained. Next, the measures for trailside encounters and campsite proximity encounters will be identified and selected for each indicator. The needs of management directed the
55 selection of the measures for each indicator so as to identify specific attributes that may be conducive for solitude opportunities. The selected measures will provide management the necessary information to make informed decision for potential implementation of specific management actions.
The Data Dictionary in the Pathfinder Office program would be programmed to contain the indicators and specific measures. Creating a Data Dictionary allows the data collector to choose from pre-selected attributes for each measure. By identifying pre- selected encounter attributes and programming these attributes into the Data Dictionary some researcher bias can be eliminated. The Data Dictionary created specifically for this program was titled ‘Wilderness Encounters’.
Data Collection Event
Metadata information for the monitoring event.
(1) Start time (2) Date (3) Day of the week (4) Name of collector (5) Trail name (6) Weather conditions (7) Temperature (8) Protocol used (9) Survey project name
Table 5 Metadata for data collection events
Data is first collected and recorded for each individual monitoring event. This metadata information provides the background to the event that is specific to the collector’s name, start and end times, location of encounters, weather conditions, and
56 project name. The metadata provides a foundation for the trail encounters details and campsite encounters details data.
Trail Encounters Details
Indicator: Number of groups encountered per 8 hour day on trails during primary use season.
This indicator was chosen to measure the opportunity for solitude on wilderness trails and wilderness-access trails. The indicator will be measured with observation and audible cues from visitors while traveling on trails.
The measures for this indicator are: (1) Time of contact (2) What opportunity class was the encounter? (3) Number of persons in group (4) Number of pack stock animal in group (5) Number of dogs in group (6) Group type? (7) Visitor use type? (8) Was group heard, seen, or both? (9) Where was this group’s location? (10) What was this group’s travel direction? (11) Was this group previously encountered? (12) Was registration card in possession?
Table 6 Trail encounters data collection details
The measures for the trail encounter indicator provide specific details to quantify the opportunity solitude along trail corridors. Each trail monitoring area will be evaluated with these measures.
57
Campsite Encounters Details
Indicator: Number of groups camped within sight or continuous sound of an occupied campsite during primary use season.
This indicator was chosen to measure the opportunity for solitude at wilderness campsites. The indicator will be measured by observing, listening and maps of existing campsite locations, and documenting occupied campsites.
The measures for this indicator are: (1) Time of contact (2) What opportunity class was the encounter? (3) What location is the campsite? (4) Which campsite is it? (5) Is this group having a campfire? (6) How many tents in this camp? (7) Does this group have a dog? (8) Does this group have pack stock animals? (9) How many other camps in sight/sound?
Table 7 Campsite encounters data collection details
The measures for the campsite encounter indicator will also provide specific details to quantify the opportunities for solitude at destination campsites and campsites along trail corridors. Each trail-corridor will combine campsite encounters and trail encounters into one monitoring area.
Standards
To measure the collected trail data in each OC, the time would be standardized to an eight hour period for trail encounters while campsite encounters can be collected
58 anytime, but evening or early morning is preferable because it has been found that most overnight visitors are not traveling at this time.
For each OC, standards were developed for each indicator. The results from the monitoring efforts will be compared to specified standards to conclude if the solitude quality is within acceptable limits. These hypothetical standards were developed as a measuring tool for the collected data. The standards were formulated by analyzing and incorporating existing monitoring programs in other wilderness areas.
Limits of Acceptable Change
OC: Indicator: Indicator: Wilderness Campsite Trail Encounters Opportunity Spectrum Encounters Standards (WOS) Standards 80% probability of not more than 1 group Occupied campsites Opportunity Class I encounter per 8 hour should not be seen or (OCI) day when traveling heard during primary season. 80% probability of not more than 3 group 80% probability of not Opportunity Class II encounters per 8 hour more than 1 campsite (OCII) day when traveling seen or heard during primary season. 80% probability of not 80% probability of not more than 7 group Opportunity Class III more than 2 encounters per 8 hour (OCIII) campsites are seen or day when traveling heard during primary season. 80% probability of not 80% probability of not more than 12 group Opportunity Class IV more than 3 encounters per 8 hour (OCIV) campsites are seen or day when traveling heard during primary season. Table 8 Limits of Acceptable Change standards
59
PART II:
THE PROTOCOL FOR MONITORING SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES
60
Jennie Lakes Wilderness Encounters Monitoring Protocol
This protocol was developed to assist field personnel in completing the Jennie Lakes Wilderness Trail Encounters and Campsite Encounters Monitoring with the Trimble data collection tool and paper worksheets.
The purposes for monitoring solitude opportunities along the trails and at known wilderness campsites areas in Jennie Lakes Wilderness are (1) to provide managers with baseline data on the solitude opportunity in Wilderness, (2) to document solitude opportunities so that changes over time can be measured, and (3) to collect current information for eventual inclusion into a Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) wilderness planning process. Information provided by the monitoring efforts will help in determining overall strategies to maintain or improve the solitude quality in the Jennie Lakes Wilderness.
Several types of information are included in this protocol. A list of definitions for key words is provided for field personnel to help comprehend uncommon terms. Another section is dedicated to step-by-step descriptions of how each measure for particular indicator should be evaluated. Finally, the operating procedures and general troubleshooting of the Trimble unit and the TerraSync software will be described.
Definitions
Protocol A documented set of rules or instructions pertaining to the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data or information (Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Monitoring Area A monitoring area is a defined geographical location within which encounter data are collected. It can be a trail corridor, a destination, an off-trail area, or a combination of these. It should make sense from a managerial visitor use perspective (Hall, 2012).
Data Collection Event A monitoring session where a 4-hour (or longer) block of time of encounter data is collected, within a specified monitoring area. This can be either one continuous block of time, or total during a given day (Hall, 2012).
Encounter An event that occurs when an observer sees or hears at least one other person, regardless of the duration or proximity of the contact. Encounters are recorded as the number of people seen or heard (Hall, 2012).
61
Trail Encounter People you see and/or hear while traveling on or off trail, but not at camp (Hall, 2012).
Campsite Encounter Other groups camped within sight or sound of any occupied campsite (Hall, 2012).
Opportunity Class Designates the availability of a particular quality or kind of experience that is appropriate to the conditions (Hendee & Dawson, 2009).
Global Positioning System (GPS) A navigational system involving satellites and computers that can determine the latitude and longitude of location by computing the time difference for signals from different satellites to reach the receiver (Wilderness.net, 2012b).
Campsite The amount of area that the campsite includes, including satellite tent areas, cooking areas, and stock-holding areas (Rolloff, n.d.).
Trail A foot path, typically of natural origins, which is maintained by the U.S. Forest Service or shown on official U.S. Government topographic maps (Rolloff, n.d.).
Social trail Informal trails providing access to water sources, the main trail, or adjacent campsites (Rolloff, n.d.).
Pack Stock Animal An animal as a mule, horse, or llama, used to carry loads or people (McCawley, 1996).
Group A number of individuals (or a single individual) collected, situated, and classified together (McCawley, 1996).
Campfire An outdoor fire in a camp, typically built in a ring of rocks where a wood fire has been and where a wood fire could be built again without significant modification to the ring of rocks (Rolloff, n.d.).
Tent A movable shelter consisting of material stretched over a supporting frame (McCawley, 1996).
62
Registration Card A document or card certifying that a group has completed the registration process to travel into wilderness (McCawley, 1996).
Visible The act of seeing, where one uses sight to observe the actions of other people.
Audible The act of hearing, where one uses sound to distinguish the difference between the sounds people make versus natural sounds.
Weekend A time frame typically associated to Saturday and Sunday.
Weekday A time frame typically associated from Monday to Friday.
Holiday A recognized national day of observance as in Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day.
Day Users A person or group that visits an area for a short specified time, usually not involved in staying in the area overnight.
Backpackers A person or group that visits an area for a time frame of more than 24 hours, usually involving an overnight stay.
Data Collection Instructions
Primary items needed for data collection field work:
Backpack for equipment Protocol manual Trimble GPS receiver unit Campsite location maps Trimble carrying case Trail Opportunity Class (OC) maps Range pole with GPS antenna Data collection form (paper copy) Fully-charged GPS battery One Pencil and one pen Spare GPS battery Clock or watch
63
A. Layout of the Trimble unit:
The unit may look different with the Otter Box case installed. The essential buttons and connections are behind black rubber covers and can be accessed with the Otter Box case installed.
Figure 12 Trimble unit
64
Figure 13 Backside of Trimble unit
Figure 14 Trimble unit in Otter box cover
65
Figure 15 Backpack set-up with Trimble unit and range pole antenna installed
66
Figure 16 Close-up of Trimble unit in carrying case
Figure 17 Backpack set-up on uniformed Forest Service data collector
67
B. Starting the Trimble unit and TerraSync software
1) Turn on the Trimble unit by pressing and holding the power button until the Trimble logo is displayed, then release. 2) After start up is complete, Trimble desktop will be displayed as shown.
If a screen other than what is shown is displayed, press the home button on the lower left corner of the unit.
Figure 18 Starting Trimble unit
68
3) Tap the Start button, and then tap TerraSync to start the program.
Figure 19 Starting TerraSync software
4) The TerraSync program will start and automatically make GPS connections and fetch the satellite almanac. Wait a few minutes until the unit displays a similar screen as shown below.
Note: If similar screen does not display a (satellite icon) after 3 minutes as shown, see troubleshooting at section C.7 of this Part.
Figure 20 Ensure satellite reception in Terrasync
69
5) Tapping on Status will display sections in the menu pull-down. These sections are Map, Data, Navigation, Status, and Setup.
The keyboard can be opened and closed by tapping on the keyboard icon. Keyboard is shown as an example.
Figure 21 Section menu pull-down in TerraSync
C. How to enter encounters data into TerraSync
1) To start data collection, tap on Data to open section then tap on Create.
Ensure the File Type, Location, and Dictionary Name parameters are set as shown. Use menu pull-down to select appropriate. Leave default File Name.
Figure 22 Create data in TerraSync
70
2) Confirm antenna height or change measured height with keyboard functions, then tap OK.
Figure 23 Confirm antenna height in TerraSync
3) Data collection screen displays Data Collection Event, Trail Encounters Details, and Campsite Encounter Details buttons.
Point_generic, Line_generic, and Area_generic are not used in this protocol. Simply disregard at this time.
Figure 24 Data collection screen in TerraSync
71
4) Before traveling into Monitoring Area, tap on Data Collection Event to open the screen of measures. Make selections on page, and then tap Log to start the event, and then begin traveling trail. Place unit into carrying case while traveling. Note: Evaluations for each measure can be found in section E of this Part.
Data Collection Event is a line feature and should continuously log a point every two seconds when the pulsing icon is displayed in place of icon.
Note: When traveling from one system trail to another system trail, a new Data Collection Event must be created. Simply tap OK and reenter data, but select appropriate trail from the menu drop-down.
Figure 25 Data collection event screen in TerraSync
72
5) To enter a Trail Encounter while collecting line features in the Data Collection Event, stop in place and tap on Options/Nest/Trail Encounters Details to open the measures for trail encounters. Make selections on page, and then tap Log to start collecting the point feature. Note: Evaluations for each measure can be found in section E of this part.
a. b.
c. d. Figure 26 Trail encounters data entry in TerraSync
73
After a minimum of 5 point features are collected during Log, tap OK to store and to return to the Data Collection Event.
e. Figure 27 Ensure point collections in TerraSync
In the Data Collection Event screen, tap Resume to continue collecting line features of the event. Continue traveling the Monitoring Area.
f. Figure 28 Resume/end data collection event in TerraSync
74
6) To enter a Campsite Encounter while collecting line features in the Data Collection Event, stop in place and tap on Options/Nest/Campsite Encounters Details to open the measures for campsite encounters. Make selections on page, and then tap Log to start collecting the point feature. Note: Evaluations for each measure can be found in section E of this Part.
a. b.
c. d. Figure 29 Campsite encounters data entry in TerraSync
75
After a minimum of 5 point features are collected during Log, tap OK to store and to return to the Data Collection Event.
e. Figure 30 Ensure points collection in TerraSync
In the Data Collection Event screen, tap Resume to continue collecting line features of the event. Continue traveling the Monitoring Area.
To end the Data Collection Event, tap OK to close and store the event. To start a new event, see section B.3, figure 18 of this Part.
f. Figure 31 Resume/end data collection event screen in TerraSync
Note: Failure to shut down the TerraSync program correctly may result in corrupted data subsequently losing all data.
76
7) Shut Down Procedures and Troubleshooting:
Note: Failure to shut down the TerraSync program correctly may result in corrupted data subsequently losing all data
To close TerraSync program, tap the X in the upper right corner of the screen. Then tap Yes to confirm exit of program. To shut down the Trimble unit, Press & hold the power button and wait for the 3 second countdown on the screen. This shut-down order is critically important to preserve data.
a. If GPS unit fails to connect with satellite, reset GPS receiver in Setup section menu-pull down.
b. If errors occur when closing TerraSync software program, tap OK to clear.
c. If error occurs and freezes program on screen, a hard reset can be performed to the Trimble unit by manually removing and reinstalling battery and then restarting.
D. How to enter encounters data onto paper forms
Paper forms will be used in situations when electronic equipment fails while out in the field. To ensure data collections efforts and goals are not diminished by a loss of ability to collect data on scheduled dates, paper forms will employed as a backup to electronic equipment.
The paper forms represent the minimum data required to compose a simple analysis of the solitude quality for the scheduled day. Every attempt should be made to collect data on electronic devices as this will provide for more detailed reports for analysis. In the instance paper forms are used, ensure the form is accurate and complete. The measures on the paper form will follow similar the similar protocol standards outlined in section E of this part where the only difference is the quantity of measures.
If paper forms are used, ensure the data steward receives these forms upon return to the office. These forms are to be manually entered by the data steward with the data collector to ensure data entry is as accurate as possible. The electronic equipment should be repaired prior to the next scheduled data collection date.
77
Jennie Lakes Wilderness Encounters Monitoring Form Data Collection Event
What Day of the Who is Collecting What Trail Are Start Time Date End Time Week is It? Data? You On?
Trail Encounter Details
What Opportunity Was Group Just Number Of Persons Visitor Use Type? Was Group Time of Contact Class Was The Heard, Just Seen, In Group? Backpack or Day Use Previously Seen? Encounter? or Both?
Campsite Encounter Details
What Opportunity How Many Other What Location Is This Time of Contact Class Was The Which Campsite Is It? Camps In Campsite? Encounter? Sight/Sound?
Table 9 Data collection form
78
E. How to measure the event & encounter indicators
1) Data Collection Event
Start Time – Automatically inserted when created
Date – Automatically inserted when created
What Day Of The Week Is It? – Select ‘Weekday’, ‘Weekend’, or ‘Holiday’. A weekday is Monday through Friday. A weekend is Saturday and Sunday. A holiday is a federally recognized day of observance which would be Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day no matter what day of the week.
Who Is Collecting Data? – Enter data collector’s last name or three letter initials of first, middle, and last name.
What Trail Are You On? – Choose from menu pull-down of trails and tap to select appropriate trail. Use opportunity class (OC) trail maps to ensure the trail name and monitoring area. Use the ‘social trail’ option when monitoring campsites off the system trails.
What Are The Weather Conditions? – Choose from the picklist using personal observations.
What Is The Temperature Range? – Choose from the picklist using personal observations
What Is The Protocol Being Used? – Automatically inserted when created.
What Is The Project Name? – Automatically inserted when created
End Time – Automatically entered upon exit of Data Collection Event.
2) Trail Encounter Details
Time Of Contact – Automatically inserted when created.
What Opportunity Class Was This Encounter? – Using the opportunity class map, select appropriate class. OC I is selection ‘I’, OC II is selection ‘II’, OC III is selection ‘III’, and OC IV is selection ‘IV’.
79
Number Of Persons In Group – Using keyboard, insert the number of persons in the group. A group that is seen previously should be counted as a new group if there was 15 minutes of separation from previous encounter. Number Of Pack Stock Animals In Group – Using keyboard, insert the number of animals in group. Count each pack stock animal, including animals with persons riding and animals packed for towing.
Number Of Dogs In Group – Using keyboard, insert the number of dogs observed with group.
Group Type – Select from the picklist. Choose ‘Hiking’ if group is using foot as mode of travel. Select ‘Riding Stock’ if travelers are observed riding stock animals. Choose ‘Illegal Modes’ if traveling on wheeled vehicles in wilderness only. Choose ‘Other’ if using an alternate mode not categorized in this selection.
Visitor Use Type – Select ‘Day Use’ if pack is appears to have no overnight equipment. Select backpacker if a large pack is observed and appears an overnight stay is planned.
Was Group Heard, Seen, or Both? – If group was only heard from any distance and not observed, then select ‘Just Heard’. If group was observed from any distance and outside of audible range, then select ‘Just Seen’. If group was seen and heard, then select Both’.
Where Was This Group’s Location? – Select ‘On-Trail’ if group was observed on the system trail and traveling on the tread of the trail. Select ‘Off-Trail’ if group was observed off the system trail and traveling cross-country.
What Was The Group’s Travel Direction? – Using best judgment, select either ‘inbound to wilderness’ or ‘outbound from wilderness’. If travel pattern and destination is unknown, select ‘don’t know’.
Was This Group Previously Encountered? – Select ‘yes’ if group was previously recorded as an encounter. Select ‘no’ if group is a new encounter.
Was Registration Card In Possession? – From observation only, was a registration card in view? Select ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
Notes – Using keyboard, type any unique attributes that should be reported.
Camera – If unsure about an encounter or to create a photo record of a unique attribute, take a photo (optional).
80
3) Campsite Encounter Details
Time of Contact – Automatically inserted when created.
What Opportunity Class Was This Encounter? – Using the opportunity class map, select appropriate class. OC I is selection ‘I’, OC II is selection ‘II’, OC III is selection ‘III’, and OC IV is selection ‘IV’.
What Location Is This Campsite? – Select location in regards to campsite location map. Select ‘other’ if campsite location is found in an area not identified by map.
Which Campsite Is It? – Using campsite location map, select the number according to the map’s campsite number with keyboard. If campsite is not mapped, select ‘0’.
Is This Group Having A Campfire? – Select ‘yes’ if there is evidence there was or will be a campfire. Select ‘no’ if evidence suggests there is no campfire or may not occur. If unknown, select ‘don’t know’.
How Many Tents In This Camp? – Count the number of tents observed in this camp and insert number count with keyboard.
Does This Group Have A Dog? – Select ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘don’t know’.
Does This Group Have Pack Stock Animals? – Select ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘don’t know’.
How Many Other Camps In Sight/Sound? – Count the number of occupied campsites within sight or sound of this campsite and insert with keyboard. An occupied campsite is a site with obvious signs of camping equipment set up for an overnight stay.
81
PART III:
THE STORAGE AND ANALYSIS OF SOLITUDE OPPORTUNITIES DATA
82
Pathfinder Office
Upon return to the office from monitoring trips, the Data Collection Event will be downloaded into Pathfinder Office and examined for accuracy, clarity, and consistency.
The screenshot below represents a pilot test of the data collection system and shown as an example. The Pathfinder Office program displays the collected data as four windows; (1) map, (2) timeline, (3) position properties, and (4) feature properties.
Figure 32 Pathfinder Office screen
The map window permits the data to be viewed spatially on a topographical map display. For every feature collected, the point is displayed on the map including the specific attributes of the point feature. The map provides a general representation to the route the data collector followed, the physical location of the encounter, and a geo- references for the data entered by the data collector. The plot map function allows for the map to be exported as a separate document to accompany the data.
83
The timeline window displays the data on a temporal scale to obtain exact time of encounters and includes the total time of the Data Collection Event. Cross referencing the information with the procedures set forth in the protocol will ensure data was collected in a consistent manner. From either the map window or the timeline window, position properties and features properties can be evaluated for accurate inputs. In the timeline window, a position or point can be highlighted subsequently displaying the position properties and the feature properties.
The position properties displays the geographical location of the point as latitude and longitude including the altitude, date, time, and the accuracies of the collected data with regards to GPS referencing. The feature properties display the indicator’s measures of the selected point. Each trail encounter and campsite encounter can be selected and viewed to analyze the selected inputs for errors
Ultimately, Pathfinder Office software permits the data steward to inspect the data for accuracy and to ensure errors are removed prior to exporting into Microsoft Access and Excel for reports and analysis. Employing the dates on the monitoring schedule and by the end of the monitoring season, there would be 40 total unique monitoring events thereby generating 40 files in Pathfinder Office.
Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel
After examining the collected data in Pathfinder Office, the data is formatted and prepared for exporting into a Microsoft Access database. The export function permits the next steps of creating reports for analysis and upward reporting.
84
Once exported into a Microsoft Access database, there are four tables created
(figure 35). The first table contains the line features from the Data Collection Event and will contain many points collected along the trail. The line feature can be imagined as a
‘bread crumb trail’ that collects selected attributes through the monitoring area. In addition to the measures identified in the protocol, geospatial data in the form of latitude, longitude, and altitude are recorded into this table of the database.
The second table contains trail encounter details and comprises of the individual and specific data recordings from each trail encounter. Similarly, the third table is data from the campsite encounters. The fourth table extracted from the data is titled ‘notes’ which contains general information but more importantly the end time of the Data
Collection Event.
Microsoft Access is a powerful tool for creating data tables, queries, forms, and reports including exporting data to Microsoft Excel. By exporting to Excel, the four tables can be combined into one spreadsheet and queried to generate specific spreadsheets. One workbook can contain many specific spreadsheets with charts for a visual representation of conditions in the field.
Data Storage
The data collected in the Pathfinder Office program and downloaded to PC will be stored according to its default file path created in TerraSync, typically starting with the
‘R’ pre-fix, then two-digit month, two-digit year, two or three-digit file identifier, and finally, the three-letter file extension. For example, ‘R092113A.SSF’, while a differentially corrected data file will have a file extension of ‘.COR’ in the same folder,
85 as shown in Figure 31. In this folder, there will be 40 ‘.SSP’ files and 40 ‘.COR’ files.
While the ‘.SSP’ files are accurate, the differentially corrected data portrays a high precision location and the most accurate geospatial data. The differentially corrected,
‘.COR’ files are verified for accuracy, stored numerically by date in
C:\Pfdata\Encounters, and finally exported to Microsoft Access for storage and analysis.
Figure 33 Stored location of encounters data
Accordingly, each date on the monitoring schedule will have a corresponding folder to store one Microsoft Access file and one workbook that contains the four exported Excel spreadsheets, so by the end of the monitoring season there would be 40 folders with the individual date for its title. Also, the opportunity class assignment rating and monitoring area number will be inserted into the title of the folder to further distinguish its application. For instance, monitoring area one in opportunity class IV scheduled to be monitored on May 28 will have a title of ‘OCIV_5-28_MA1’. Finally, these 40 folders will be stored on local PC in C:\Documents and Settings\mmacias\My
86
Documents\My Folder\Wilderness\2013_Wilderness_Encounters_Data, as shown in
Figure 33.
Figure 34 Stored location of scheduled monitoring events
Analysis
The exported data is viewed in Microsoft Access where various tables, forms, queries, and reports can be performed. The data can also be examined for clarity through multiple page reports of individual encounters. The database will maintain every trail encounter and campsite encounter made for this specific monitoring event in this monitoring area. Figure 35 displays the four tables created in Microsoft Access before exported into Microsoft Excel.
87
Figure 35 Exported Pathfinder Office data into Microsoft Access
In Figure 36, the tabs at the bottom of the Microsoft Excel workbook shows the four spreadsheets imported from Microsoft Access and the two spreadsheets created for analysis.
88
Figure 36 Data exported from Microsoft Access into Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and workbook
Trail Encounter Analysis
In Microsoft Excel, the four data tables are formatted onto individual spreadsheets and also into one workbook. A fifth spreadsheet in this workbook is created to combine the data needed to perform a comparative analysis of trail encounters to the developed
LAC standards for each opportunity class. Table 10 depicts a hypothetical trail encounter analysis for Monitoring Area 1.
To explain the analysis, the ten group encounters are divided into the 4.1 hour day for total of 2.44 average groups per hour (GPH). GPH is multiplied by an 8 hour monitoring day to equal 19.5 groups encountered per day. The LAC standards stated there would be no more than 12 encounters per day in OCIV and in this example the standards were exceeded by 7.5 groups.
89
Group Day of Start End Time of Person Date Trail Name Oppty Class Group Previous Seen Encounter Week Time Time Contact Count 1 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 13:24 29E03 Big Meadow Tra IV 1 No 2 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 13:45 29E03 Big Meadow Tra IV 2 No 3 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 14:30 29E03 Big Meadow Tra IV 4 No 4 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 14:31 29E03 Big Meadow Tra IV 6 No 5 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 14:32 29E03 Big Meadow Tra IV 2 No 6 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 15:15 30E09 Weaver Lake Tra IV 2 No 7 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 15:45 30E09 Weaver Lake Tra IV 1 No 8 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 16:30 30E09 Weaver Lake Tra IV 2 No 9 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 16:59 30E09 Weaver Lake Tra IV 1 No 10 9/21/2012 Weekday 13:23 17:29 17:25 30E09A Weaver Lake Cut IV 1 No
Total Group Total Monitoring Total Persons Avg. Groups Per Hour Avg. Persons Per Hour Encounters Hours 10 22 4:06 or 4.1 2.44 5.37
Avg. Groups Per Day Avg. Persons Per Day 19.5 43
Table 10 Example of trail encounters data collection monitoring event with analysis
Ultimately, there will be an additional nine days of monitoring for the example above for a total of ten days and at the end of the primary season, the 80% probability calculation will be made as described in Table 11. There will be a total of four reports that pertains to each opportunity classes. For a detailed analysis, the results could also examine the individual monitoring areas for a total of ten reports instead of the four OCs.
Days Monitored - Days Standard is Exceeded X 100 = ____ % probability OC____ MA____ Days Monitored
Table 11 Probability equation
As an example of the calculations, Table 12 shows the ten monitoring days were collected for the season in an OC and it was concluded that four of these days exceeded the standard, then it would result that there is a 60% probability of twelve trail encounters or less would occur. This result would have exceeded the LAC standards set forth in this project for the primary use season.
90
10 - 4 X 100 = 60 % probability OC IV MA____ 10
Table 12 Example of probability equation and results
Campsite Encounter Analysis
In the same Excel workbook described for the previous example, a sixth spreadsheet would be created and formatted for campsite encounter analysis. The campsite encounter details are included with trail encounter details as a monitoring area, so campsite data would be collected along with trail encounter data on the same scheduled day for a particular OC. This spreadsheet incorporates spreadsheet data from the trail encounter details, from the notes, and from the data collection event to execute the campsite encounter analysis. In Table 13, the spreadsheet depicts a hypothetical campsite encounter analysis for Monitoring Area 1. There were five campsite encounters on the scheduled monitoring day at Weaver Lake, an OCIV area, and was concluded that no campsite exceeded the standard of more than three campsites within sight or sound of another. For this day, the encounters were with standards.
91
Group Day of Start End Time of Campsite Date Campsite Location Which Campsite Oppty Class Encounter Week Time Time Contact Proximity 1 9/21/2012 Weekday 17:29 18:00 17:30 Weaver Lake 1 IV 2 2 9/21/2012 Weekday 17:29 18:00 17:31 Weaver Lake 4 IV 2 3 9/21/2012 Weekday 17:29 18:00 17:39 Weaver Lake 7 IV 0 4 9/21/2012 Weekday 17:29 18:00 17:45 Weaver Lake 11 IV 0 5 9/21/2012 Weekday 17:29 18:00 17:51 Weaver Lake 13 IV 1
Total Group 3+ campsites in 2+ campsites in 1+ campsite in 0 campsites in Encounters proximity proximity proximity proximity 5 0 2 3 2
Opportunity Class IV - no more than 3 campsites within sight or sound
Table 13 Example of campsite encounters data collection monitoring event with analysis
To mirror the trail encounters monitoring analysis, eventually there would be an additional nine days of data collection for a total of ten days of data for each OC.
Similarly, there will be a total of four reports that pertains to the opportunity classes and for a more detailed analysis, the analysis could provide also include the individual monitoring areas for a total of ten reports.
Days Monitored - Days Standard is Exceeded X 100 = ___ % probability OC___ Days Monitored
Table 14 Probability equation
As an example of the calculations, if ten monitoring days were collected for the season in an OC and was concluded that two of these days exceeded the standard, then it would result that there was 80% probability that 3 or more campsites will not be encountered. This result would be within the LAC standards set forth in this project for the primary use season.
92
10-2 X 100 = 80 % probability OC IV 10
Table 15 Example of probability equation and results
93
Chapter 5
SUMMARY
This project’s purpose is to develop a plan to measure the solitude quality and availability of solitude opportunities in Jennie Lakes Wilderness as mandated in the
Wilderness Act. The implementation of this monitoring program will provide information about the current levels of solitude opportunities and could, indeed conclude that visitors to Jennie Lakes Wilderness are finding solitude. On the other hand, if monitoring efforts reveal solitude opportunities are below standard, a suggestion would be to continue the monitoring efforts to scientifically study the visitor use trend. If further monitoring efforts find consistently low standards, then a suggestion will be to identify a course of action and attempt to mediate with existing forest plans and policy.
Because management actions require collaboration with stakeholders to generate solutions, identifying solutions for below standards are beyond the scope of this project.
However, to provide the information to develop management actions, baseline standards need to be defined. Ideally, a goal of this project was to begin to fulfill this need and to identify a relationship between quantities of visitors with the quality of a wilderness solitude experience at the local Jennie Lakes Wilderness level. This information would then assist wilderness managers to begin to formulate a prescription to mitigate solitude opportunities that are found outside of the Limits of Acceptable Change standards.
Discussion
This Wilderness Encounters Monitoring Program is scheduled to be field tested for year 2013 season. In the meantime, an evaluation of the three part program revealed
94 potential issues that could affect the final products of the program. Some of the answers to these issues may be found during field testing, while there may be others not recognizable beforehand.
During the development of the project in the summer of 2012, pilot testing of program components exposed a few issues related to the data’s integrity and quality when entered into the Trimble unit, while the other was the human factor in comprehending and interpreting the protocol.
Because the Trimble unit is an electronic field computer, there are advantages and disadvantages that could influence the monitoring efforts of the program. First of all, the benefits of the unit include its ability to collect the GPS point location of encounters data entries. This big-picture perspective of individual encounters in the field in relation to the wilderness boundaries will provide a visual representation of solitude opportunity locations for wilderness managers and stakeholders. Without this map product, the data points would be reported as numerical data and be difficult to spatially comprehend.
Incorporating this option into monitoring reports is highly suggested to generate visual maps for stakeholders.
Another advantage of the Trimble unit is the ability to electronically capture and store the attributes of trailside and campsites proximity encounters. Traditionally, paper forms were used to collect various forms of data and it was found that most completed forms sat on the shelf, ultimately becoming outdated for an accurate analysis of current conditions. With encounter data recorded and stored electronically, the effort required for data analysis becomes simpler because of the ease of uploading to software programs
95 and creating reporting products. A report of current conditions could be found to be crucial for managers because it would help conceptualize remedies to maintain or improve solitude opportunities in wilderness.
A disadvantage found during trial testing with the Trimble unit was the tendency for data collectors to interpret the data collection protocol and enter inaccurate information. Apparently, this is a known weakness for most data collection efforts and must be met with clear and consistent training of the protocol. One solution for this issue is to analyze the data with individual data collectors prior to exporting and generating reports. Data that is not screened for accurate results and is not arrived from the protocol standard may result in invalid datasets thereby skewing and voiding the final analysis.
Data collectors must be able to fully comprehend the protocol and this requires thorough training to insure questions or discrepancies are identified.
An intentional omission in the project is that no prescriptions were provided if data collection results were found outside of the program standards. However, if results conclude that solitude opportunities are below standards, this could influence wilderness managers to begin forming management actions. As discussed previously, collaboration and outreach to stakeholders is required to develop an action to make the area within standards, but when the wilderness does not have a Wilderness Plan with clear objectives, this effort may be most challenging.
As a final point of the program’s benefits is the ability to distinguish current conditions and opportunities regarding the solitude quality. Because of many attributes collected during monitoring efforts, a variety of reporting products can provide snapshots
96 of current conditions. The data attributes, when queried appropriately, can provide a wide variety of reporting products for analysis and upward reporting to managers and stakeholders. Ultimately, this program could produce data needed for improving or stabilizing the quality of solitude, to ensure solitude opportunities are available in Jennie
Lakes Wilderness.
97
REFERENCES
The Wilderness Act, Public Law 88-577 (September 3, 1964).
The California Wilderness Act, Public Law 98-425. (September 28, 1984).
Creation and growth of the National Wilderness Preservation System. (2012, September
25). Retrieved from Wilderness.net: http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/fastfacts
Interpretation and Education Toolbox. (2012, September 25). Retrieved from
Wilderness.net Web site:
http://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/documents/education/Hume%20Lake%20Ra
nger%20District%20Wilderness%20Education%20Plan.doc
Wilderness information management – Key terms, definitions & acronyms. (2012,
September 25). Retrieved from Wilderness.net Web site:
http://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/documents/WINA/Wilderness%20Informati
on%20Management%20Definitions.pdf
Ashley, P. (2007). Toward an understanding and definition of wilderness spirituality.
Australian Geographer, 38(1), 53-69.
Beedie, P. (2003). Mountain guiding and adventure tourism: Reflections on the
choreography of the experience. Leisure Studies, 22(2), 147-167.
Broom, T. J., & Hall, T. E. (n.d.). A guide to monitoring encounters in wilderness.
Prepared for the U.S. Forest Service: University of Idaho, College of Natural
Resources, Department of Conservation Social Sciences.
Clark, R. N., & Stankey, G. H. (1979). The recreation opportunity spectrum: A
framework for planning, management, and research. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-98;
98
Portland, OR: U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Nortwest Forest and Range Experiment
Station.
Cole, D. N. (1997). Solitude: Researchers continue to delve into solitude component of
wilderness. Signpost for Northwest Trails, Jan. 33-44.
Cole, D. N., & Landres, P. B. (1996). Threats to wilderness ecosystems: Impacts and
research needs. Ecological Applications, 6(1), 168-184.
Creyer, E., Ross, W., & Evers, D. (2003). Risky recreation: An exploration of factors
influencing the likelihood of participation and the effects of experience. Leisure
Studies, 22(3), 239-253.
Driver, B. L., Brown, P. J., Stankey, G. H., & Gregoire, T. G. (1987). The ROS planning
system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed. Leisure Sciences, 9(3),
201-212.
Farber, M. E., & Hall, T. E. (2007). Emotion and environment: Visitors' extraordinary
experiences along the Dalton highway in Alaska. Journal of Leisure Research,
39(2), 248-270.
Gunderson, K., Barns, C. V., Hendricks, W. W., & McAvoy, L. H. (2000). Wilderness
Education: An Updated Review of the Literature and New Directions for
Research and Practice. In: Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William
T.; O’Loughlin, Jennifer, comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of change
conference— Volume 4: Wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor
management; 2000 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. (pp. 253-259). Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
99
Hall, T. E. (2012). Draft: Monitoring for outstanding opportunities for solitude or
primitive and unconfined recreation. University of Idaho: Prepared for the U.S.
Forest Service.
Hammitt, W. (1994). The psychology and functions of wilderness solitude. In: Hendee,
John C.; Martin, Vance G., eds. International Wilderness Allocation,
Management, and Research, 227-233.
Hass, G. E., Driver, B. L., Brown, P. J., & Lucas, R. C. (1987). Wilderness Management
Zoning. Journal of Forestry, 85(12), 17-21.
Heintzman, P. (2003). The wilderness experience and spirituality. JOPERD: Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 74(6), 27-31.
Hendee, J. C., & Dawson, C. P. (2009). Wilderness management: Stewardship and
protection of resource and values. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing.
Johnson, B. (2002). On the spiritual benefits of wilderness. International Journal of
Wilderness, 8(3), 28-32.
Kaye, R. (2006). The spiritual dimension of wilderness. International Journal of
Wilderness, 12(3), 4-7.
Landres, P., Boutcher, S., Dean, L., Hall, T., Blett, T., Carlson, T., . . . Bumpus, D.
(2009). Technical guide for monitoring selected conditions related to wilderness
character. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-151. Fort Collins, CO: U.S Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
Landres, P., Boutcher, S., Merigliano, L., Barns, C., Davis, D., Hall, T., . . . Sater, S.
(2005). Monitoring selected conditions related to widlerness character: A
100
national framework. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-151, Fort Collins,
CO. : U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
Manning, R. E., & Lime, D. W. (2000). Defining and managing the quality of wilderness
recreation experiences. In: Cole, D.; McCool, S.; Borrie, W.; O'Laughlin, J.;
comps.; Wilderness science in a time of change conference - Volume 4:
Wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor management; 1999 May 23-27;
Missoula, MT. RMRS-P-15-VOL-4, Ogden UT: U.S. Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Research Station.
Nash, R. (1973). Wilderness and the American mind (2nd ed.). New Haven: Yale
Univeristy Press.
Pan, S., & Ryan, C. (2007). Mountain areas and visitor usage - Motivations and
determinants of satisfaction: The case of Pirongia Forest Park, New Zealand.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(3), 288-308.
Powici, C. (2004). What is wilderness? John Muir and the question of the wild. Scottish
Studies Review, 5(1), 74-86.
Rolloff, D. (n.d.). Desolation wilderness campsite inventory protocol.
Sequoia National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. (1988). Forest Plan. U.S.
Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sequoia National Forest.
Stankey, G. H., Cole, D. N., Lucas, R. C., Petersen, M. E., & Frissell, S. S. (1985). The
limits of acceptable change (LAC) system for wilderness planning. Gen. Tech.
Rep. INT-176. Ogden, UT: U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range
Exper.
101
Strohl, J. E. (2001). Religion vs. spirituality. A Journal of Theology, 40(4), 274-276.
Thompson, T. L. (2005, February 7). 10YWSC Announcement. Retrieved September 25,
2012, from The 10-Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge (10YWSC) Web site:
http://fsweb.wo.fs.fed.us/rhwr/wilderness/10ywsc/index_10ywsc.html
U.S. Forest Service. (2006, November 13). A charter for the wilderness information
management steering team. Retrieved September 25, 2012, from The Wilderness
Information Management Steering Team (WIMST) Home Page:
http://fsweb.wo.fs.fed.us/rhwr/wilderness/wimst/wimst_charter.doc
U.S. Forest Service. (2007). Forest Service Manual 2300.
U.S. Forest Service. (2012, September 25). Wilderness Stewardship brochure. Retrieved
25 September, 2012, from The 10-Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge
(10YWSC) Web Site:
http://fsweb.wo.fs.fed.us/rhwr/wilderness/10ywsc/10ywsc_brochure.pdf
Watson, A. E. (2004). Human relationships with wilderness. International Journal of
Wilderness, 10(3), 4-7.
Webster's II New Riverside Dictionary. (1996).
White, D. D., Hall, T. E., & Farrell, T. A. (2001). Influence of ecological impacts and
other campsite characteristics on wilderness visitors’ campsite choices. Journal of
Park and Recreation Administration, 19(2), 83-97.
Zuefle, D. (1999). The spirituality of recreation. Park and Recreation Magazine, 34(9),
28-30.