RECREATIONAL USE PATTERNS AT FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR, 1963-65
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Depart- ment of the Interior has basic responsibilities for water, fish, wildlife, mineral, land, park, and recreational re- sources. Indian and Territorial affairs are other major concerns of America's "Department of Natural Resources." The Department works to assure the wisest choice in managing all our resources so each will make its full contribution to a better United States -- now and in the future.
Cover photo: Flaming Gorge Dam and Reservoir, Utah and Wyoming. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation photo.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402- Price 75 cents UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Division of Fishery Services
RECREATIONAL USE PATTERNS AT FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR, 1963-65
By John G. Hewston and the late Donald R. Franklin
Utah Cooperative Fishery Unit Utah State University Logan, Utah
[John G. Hewston's present address is Division of Natural Resources, Humboldt State College, Arcata, California 95521.1
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Resource Publication 70 Washington, D.C. • January 1969 FIGURE 1.--Fisbing was the leading primary purpose of visting Flaming Gorge Reservoir during 1964 and 1965. Rainbow trout made up 99 percent of the catch. Photo: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract viii
Introduction ... 1
The study area ... 2 Climate and vegetation ...5 Accessibility ...5 Previous use ...6 Administration ...... 6 Fishery management ... 7
Methods and materials ... 8 Interviews ...... 8 Mailed questionnaires ... 8 Creel census ...9 Postal cards ... 9 Traffic counts ...9 Agency records ...... 10
Facilities ...... 11
Recreational use ...... 15 Origin of visitors ...... 16 Purpose of visit and activities ...... 16 Party size ...... 19 Length of stay ...... 19 Previous visits and party composition ...... 19 Camping ...... 19 Alternate choices ...... 21 Traffic patterns ...... 22 Use by local residents ...... 22
The sport fishery ...... 24 Estimated number of angler trips ...... 24 Regulations ...... 24 Creel census procedure ...... 25 Angler success ...... 26 Percentage with fish ...... 26 Catch rates ...... 26 Mean length of fish caught ...... 27 Fish condition ...... 28 Types of lures used ...... 28
1 11
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
Seasonal fishing patterns ...... 28 Factors influencing angler distribution ...... 28 Knowledge of area ...... 29 Regulations 29 Weather 30 Fishery resource ...... 30 Boat ramp location ...... 31 Camping and picnic facilitias ...... 31 Access 32 Location of marinas ...... 32 Characteristics of angling parties ...... 32 ORIGIN 33 Purpose of visit . 34 Party size . . . . 34 Age composition ...... 35 Parental influence ...... 35 Miscellaneous characteristics ...... 35 Percentage fishing elsewhere ...... 35 Reasons why parties did not fish ...... 36
Economic values . 37 Visitor expenditures . 37 Private businesses . . 38
Visitor satisfaction . . . . 39 Visitor attitudes . . . 39 Visitor opinions ...... 40 Best liked by visitors ...... 41 Suggested improvements ...... 41 Local resident opinions ...... 42
Discussion . . 42
Conclusions . . 43
Literature cited 45
Acknowledgements 46
Appendices 47 A. Interview schedule ...... 47 B. Interviewer's manual ...... 53
IV CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
C. Summary of responses to interviews . 58 D. Questionnaire sent to local residents 65 E. Summary of responses to questionnaire 70 F. Creel census form ...... 77 G. Summary of creel census ...... 78 H. Postal card survey form ...... 80
FIGURE 2.--The "Flying Fisherman", Gadabout Gaddis, with veteran boatman, Don Harris, fishing in the Green River below Flaming Gorge Dam. Photo: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. FIGURES AND TABLES Page
Figures 1. Rainbow trout ... ii 2. Trout fishing ...... 3. Ice fishing ...... vii 4. Fishing scene ...... vii 5. Map of Flaming Gorge Reservoir .... 2 6. View of desert portion of the reservoir .... 3 7. Flaming Gorge ....4 8. View of lower canyon portion of the reservoir ....4 9. Campground facilities ... 10 10. Location of recreation sites and study units ... 11 11. Typical concrete block toilet ... 12 12. Modern restroom facility ...12 13. Boat ramp ... 14 14. Number of visits, 1963-1965 ...15 15. Incidental activities of visitors ...18 16. Camping near the water ...57 17. Water skiing ...... 64 18. Preimpoundment treatment with rotenone ... 69 19. Green River below Flaming Gorge Reservoir ...... 76
Tables 1. Status of recreational facilities ... 13 2. Number of visits ...... 15 3. Origin of visitors, by States ...16 4. Origin of visitors, large cities ... 16 5. Primary purpose of visits. 17 6. Activities of visiting parties ... 18 7. Size of parties and length of stay ... 19 8. Types of accomodations used ... 20 9. Amount of money visitors were willing to spend . . . 21 10. Percent of visitors from traffic of major highways. . 22 11. Average number of vehicles on Route 44 ...22 12. Use of recreational sites by local parties ... 23 13. Estimates of fisherman-days ... 24 14. Angler success ...... 26 15. Reasons for fishing in certain areas ... 29 16. Origin of angling parties. ... 33 17. Primary purpose of visit and fishing ... 34 18. Reasons for not fishing. . 36 19. Local fishing license sales ... 37 20. Visitor expenditures . . . 37 21. Mean daily expenditures . ...38 22. Visitor satisfaction ....40
VI FIGURES 3 and 4.--Trout fishing provides year around recreation at Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Photos: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
VII ABSTRACT
Activities, characteristics, and satisfactions of recreationists at Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Utah-Wyoming, were studied in 1963-1965. Data were collected from interviews, questionnaires, creel censuses, and administrative agency records. Number of visits increased from an estimated 231,065 in 1963, the year the reservoir began to fill, to 521,843 in 1964 and 786,103 in 1965. Utah residents were present in 68 percent of the parties in 1963 and in 82 percent in 1964 and 1965. Wyoming, Colorado and California were the only other States contributing large numbers of visitors. In 1963, 56 percent of the parties came primarily to sight-see, but fishing for rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) became the most important primary purpose of visit during the following two years, when 42 and 37 percent came to fish. Sight-seeing was second in 1964 and 1965, with 37 and 36 percent coming primarily for that reason. Sight-seeing was the major general activity of visiting parties each year, with 74, 76, and 91 percent containing members who participated. Fishing activity, expressed as percentage of visiting parties containing someone who fished in the area (tributaries, lakes, or reservoir) rose from 16 percent in 1963 to 71 and 75 percent during the following two years, when the reservoir was open to angling. Catch rates were 1.24 fish per hour in 1964 and 1.33 in 1965, but varied with type of angling and in different parts of the reservoir. Mean length of creeled trout was 11.2 inches each year and varied on different parts of the reservoir, but fish condition declined by 1965. Distribution of anglers was influenced primarily by location of access points. Other important visitor activities included camping, photography, picnicking, hiking, boating, sunbathing, swimming, nature study, water skiing and hunting. Visitors were most satisfied with scenery and weather and least satisfied with swimming areas and fish-cleaning stations. Many boat ramps were out of the water until late each summer. Camp- grounds were designed primarily for tent campers and were not adequate to accommodate the average parties with more than one vehicle and other heavy, wheeled equipment.
VIII - RECREATIONAL USE PATTERNS AT FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR, 1963 1965
INTRODUCTION
Reservoirs make up approximately one-third of all inland fishing waters in the United States, exclusive of the Great Lakes, and support 20 percent of all sport fishing trips (Jenkins, 1961). Additional waters, however, will be needed to meet the projected demands of recreationists by the year 2000 (ORRRC, 1962), and reservoirs are expected to provide many of the new opportunities.
Although Lake Mead National Recreation Area was established in 1936, planning for reservoir-based national recreation areas in other parts of the nation requires a new approach to Federal land management. These areas are managed primarily for outdoor recreation instead of for cultural or commercial values. Existing and proposed national recreation areas frequently include Federal reservoirs and lands in more than one State. The administration of such areas, therefore, often involves more than one Federal agency working in cooperation with State governments. Planning for reservoir recreation is further complicated by the changing interests and needs of outdoor enthusiasts. More must be learned about the average visitor (Clawson and Held, 1957).
Government agencies usually measure annual use of recreation areas in terms of visits or visitor-days and occasionally refer to party-sites or family-sites or units for planning purposes. Number of persons per vehicle is frequently determined so that estimates of numbers of visitors can be gauged for specific sites or periods of time. Little information has been published about composition and size of individual parties, the amount and types of equipment used per party, or family relationships among party members. Such information would enable planners to develop recreation areas in keeping with the size and type of parties making greatest use of the area and for the amount and kinds of equipment the parties bring with them.
The fishery manager will require new information concerning the activities and motivations of anglers on new reservoirs. Knowledge of the relationships between fishing and other recreational uses and an understanding of some of the factors influencing these uses will enable planners to develop areas for the most efficient use. This study investigated some of these relationships. The objectives were: 1) to describe the recreation patterns which developed during the first three years that a new reservoir was filling and recreational facilities were being constructed; 2) to determine characteristics of visiting parties; 3) to gauge visitors' satisfaction with certain aspects of the area; and 4) to describe haw the sport fishery on a reservoir developed in relaticn to the other recreational activities. A minor supplemental objective of the project was to obtain data concerning the effects of the new recreation area upon the local economy.
ROCK VI* SPRINGS 1:VP .1111IRK. LITTLE GREEN AMERICA RIVER
WYO. 530 FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR WYO. MANILA DUTCH UTAH JOHN COLO.
UTAH 44
MONUMENT 11111rll DNIANT1INALAUR 11111Ne ipme VERNAL • n/rAbN464zewn
FIGURE 5 .--LOCATION OF FLAMING Gorge Reservoir.
THE STUDY AREA
Flaming Gorge Reservoir was chosen as the area to study the development of recreational use patterns from 1963 through 1965. Flaming Gorge Reservoir, built by the Bureau of Reclamation, is on the Green River, a tributary of the Colorado River, and is one of the major storage facilities in the Colorado River Storage Project. Flaming Gorge Dam (formerly named Ashley Dam) is located at the lower end of Red Canyon in northeastern Utah, upstream from Dinosaur National Monument, and approximately 6 miles south of the Utah-Wyoming border (figure 5). The dam is 450 feet high and a paved highway crosses its
2 top at an elevation of 6,047 feet above sea level, 7 feet above the maximum reservoir pool. Although constructed primarily for water regulation, power production, irrigation, and municipal water supply, the reservoir is expected to become one of the major recreation areas in the region (Lund, 1962). The reservoir began to fill November 1, 1962, and will be approximately 91 miles long when full. It will have a surface area of 42,000 acres, 375 miles of shoreline, and will contain 3,789,000 acre-feet of water.
Flaming Gorge Reservoir straddles the Utah-Wyoming border and is situated in two distinct types of topography. The upper portion of the reservoir is on high desert plain and extends 60 miles in a general north-south direction (figure 6).
-- FIGURE 6. Upper desert portion of Flaming Gorge Reservoir, view east from Squaw Hollow, 1964.
The desert portion ends at the mouth of Flaming Gorge, the most outstanding geological feature of the area, about 30 miles upstream from the dam (figure 7). The lower portion of the reservoir winds through rugged, steep-walled canyons of the forested eastern edge of the Uinta Mountains and runs generally east and west (figure 8).
3 FIGURE 7.--Flaming Gorge -- geological formation after which the reservoir was named.
FIGURE 8.--Lower canyon portion of Flaming Gorge Reservoir, view east from Red Canyon Viewpoint, 1964.
4 Climate and Vegetation
The climate near Flaming Gorge Reservoir varies with the elevation and topography. On the desert plain (6,100-to 6,500-feet above sea level) surrounding the upper portion of the reservoir, winters are fairly cold with little snow. Summers are warm with occasional hot days often accompanied by strong northwest winds, and local thunder- storms produce heavy downpours of short duration. Annual precipitation is 7 to 10 inches (Lund, 1962). Vegetation on the desert portion is sparse and predominantly a mixed sagebrush (Artemesia sp.) and shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia) community on bare clay or sand occasionally covered with rocks. Narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), willows (Salix sp.) and associated trees and shrubs are found only along streams (Dibble, 1960).
The mountains surrounding the canyon on the lower portion of the study area rise to over 9,000 feet, and above 6,500 feet a moderate- to-heavy snow cover persists from late fall until early May. Summer temperatures in the mountain and canyon portion are cooler than those on the desert. Side canyons bring cool air down to the reservoir surface and overhanging cliffs and trees provide abundant shade. The twisting canyons prevent winds from generating high waves on the lower part of the reservoir. Local thundershowers are frequent and annual precipitation averages 12 inches. A juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) and pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) forest near the water level gives way to ponderosa pines ( nu, ponderosa) along the canyon rim, and lodgepole pines (Pinus contorta) become dominant at elevations above 8,000 feet. Large patches of aspen (Populus tremuloides) are common at all elevations and serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) is common along Utah Highway 44 through the study area. Along streams in the canyons such trees as narrowleaf cottonwood, boxelder (Acer iaterior),- Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and blue spruce (Picea Pungens) are numerous.
Accessibility
Flaming Gorge Reservoir is located between two major trans- continental highways, U.S. 30 to the north and U.S. 40 to the south (FIGURE 5). A paved highway (Wyoming 530) runs south from Green River, Wyoming (population 3,497), along the western edge of the reservoir to Manila, Utah (population 329). Access to the reservoir from this highway is via short dirt roads (2 to 3 miles long), except at Lucerne Valley where the road is paved. Roads south from Rock Springs, Wyoming (population 10,371), on the eastern edge of the study area are unimproved dirt, poorly marked, and irregularly maintained. Visitors can reach most of the shoreline on the desert portion although several
5 places are inaccessible because of deep ravines, high cliffs and steep buttes. Access to the shoreline in the canyon portion of the reservoir, however, is limited to only a few points due to steep-walled canyons and rugged terrain. Utah State Highway 44 runs from Manila along the southern edge of the study area toward the dam, then turns south to Vernal, Utah (population 3,655). This highway was not completed during the study, but a Forest Service dirt road connected the two ends of pavement to complete the route through the mountainous portion of the study area. The dam and the community of Dutch John, Utah (population 150), are reached via paved Utah Highway 260.
Roads and recreation sites near the reservoir water-level and on the desert portion of the study area are open all year. Facilities above 6,500 feet are snowbound from late fall until spring.
Previous Use
Before the dam was constructed there was limited commercial and recreational use of the area. Ranching and lumbering were the primary commercial uses of the mountain and canyon section while ranching was the primary use along the river bottoms on the desert portion. Sport fishing within the study area was largely confined to trout fishing in the lower reaches of some mountain streams tributary to the Green River, and to angling for channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) in the warm and turbid Green River. Big-game hunting for pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana), elk (Cervus canadensis) and mule deer (Odocoilieus hemionus) brought hunters into the area each fall. A few hunted waterfowl and upland game birds (National Park Service, 1958). Boating was confined to canyon float trips conducted by one outfitter from the only resort, located on Green's Lakes near Red Canyon. One ranch at the upper part of Sheep Creek Canyon also rented cabins. The area was visited occasionally by rock hunters, arrowhead collectors, campers, and parties studying the geology, flora, and fauna of the area. Three national forest camps provided basic camping and picnic facilities but visitors were permitted to camp anywhere in the area.
Administration
Prior to the construction of the dam and the increased recreational use of the region, two Federal agencies were priLarily responsible for management of the area. The part within the Ashl y National Forest (which closely coincides with the canyon and mountain rtion of the reservoir) was under the administration of the U.S. Fol. ,t Service
6 within its Manila Ranger District. The land outside the National Forest was administered primarily by the Bureau of Land Management. Some private holdings were interspersed within the Forest Service and BIM lands. Hunting and fishing were administered by the Utah and Wyoming Fish and Game Departments within their respective state boundaries.
Following construction of Flaming Gorge Dam several administrative changes occurred. Operation of the dam, its visitor facilities, and manipulation of water levels are under the administration of the Bureau of Reclamation. Recreational demalopment and management of the portion of the study area within the Ashley National Forest remains the responsibility of the U.S. Forest Service. The part outside the National Forest boundary is administered by the National Park Service. Fishing, hunting and boating are managed cooperatively in each State by the appropriate State agency, the Forest Service, and the National Park Service, in accordance with applicable State and Federal regulations. Biological studies and fish stocking are conducted jointly by the Wyoming and Utah Fish and Game agencies, in cooperation with the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. The Forest Service and National Park Service conduct water-safety and ice-safety programs and search-and-rescue operations.
Fishery Management
Administrative agencies anticipated that the new reservoir would provide ideal habitat for trout and other game fish and that fishing would eventually become a major attraction (Utah and Wyoming Fish and Game departments, 1962). The portion of the Green River and its major tributaries in and near the area to be inundated, however, were dominated by species of fish considered undesirable by anglers.
Using Federal funds administered by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, the Colorado, Utah and Wyoming fish and game agencies conducted a fish-eradication program in 1962. Approximately 450 miles of the Green River and major tributaries located between Pinedale, Wyoming, and Browns Park, Colorado, were treated with rotenone in September, two months before the dam was closed. Stocking of game fish provided by State and Federal hatcheries began in the spring of 1963, when 500,000 kokanee salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) and 4,000,000 rainbow trout (Salmo gairdnerii) fingerlings were released into the new reservoir (Eiserman et al, 1964).
7 METHODS AND MATERIALS
Sampling methods were developed in cooperation with members of the Department of Applied Statistics at Utah State University. Data were obtained at the study area directly from samples of the visitor population and from agency records. The program was discussed with and approved by the State and Federal agencies responsible for the recreational use of the area, and a close working relationship was maintained with them. All estimates based upon the data presented should be interpreted as the best available rather than as exactitudes.
Interviews
Sample interview schedules were designed and field-tested at the study area in June 1963, and were revised to form the schedule used throughout the study (Appendix A). An Interviewer's Manual (Appendix B), was prepared so that others could use the schedule although in this study the senior author collected all interview data.
The interview schedule was divided into four parts. The first was designed to obtain information concerning activities and characteristics of parties contacted, the second to obtain creel census information, the third to solicit information about visitor attitudes toward the study area, and the fourth to gather personal information and candid opinions from each interviewee.
In 1963, 404 parties containing 2,102 people were interviewed from late June through October. In 1964, contact was made with 615 parties representing 3,337 people, from January through October. In 1965, 442 parties containing 2,573 people were interviewed, from May through October.
Mailed Questionnaires
A questionnaire was mailed in January each year to people living in the two counties encompassing the study area (Sweetwater, Wyoming, and Daggett, Utah) and the county immediately to the south (Uintah, Utah). This questionnaire was constructed to determine: 1) whether or not any member of the immediate household had visited the recreation area the previous year; 2) activities engaged in and sites used; 3) months visited; 4) opinions about the area; 5) data on recreational equipment owned before 1963; 6) recreational equipment purchased after the reservoir began bb fill; and 7) personal information about the respondent and his family (Appendix D).
8 Each year a total sample of 1,000 names of local residents was selected at random from phone books in Daggett and Uintah counties and from the Sweetwater County Directory (county directories were not available for the two Utah counties). Questionnaires returned unclaimed were sent to alternate names. In 1964, 490 questionnaires concerning the previous year's activities were returned; in 1965, 450 were returned; and in 1966, 400 questionnaires were promptly returned and reminder cards were not mailed.
Creel Census
A one-page creel census form was used which contained such usual questions as time fished, number in party, number of fish caught, angler residence, and place of contact (Appendix F).
Fishing parties in boats were contacted as they returned to the ramps. Bank fishermen were contacted while they were fishing or as they left the lake. At the beginning of each year a slate of creel- census days was drawn up to include a predetermined number of weekend days and weekdays. In selecting the portion of the reservoir to be sampled each day, the interviewer consulted a timetable of contacts by the State creel-census clerks to avoid duplication of effort. Five-hundred-eighteen parties were contacted in 1964 and 542 in 1965.
Postal Cards
A postal-card survey form was distributed to determine the percentage of travelers on U.S. Highways 30 and 40 who visited the study area each year. Information concerning their direction of travel, purpose, party size, and residence also was requested (Appendix H).
Traffic Counts
Traffic-flow counts were made on Utah Highway 44 inside the study area to determine origin of through-traffic and to estimate monthly and annual trends in traffic volume. Car counts were conducted on one weekend day and one weekday each month from June through September 1964 and 1965.
9 Agency Records
Data on fishing license sales and additional creel census information regarding catch rates were supplied by the Utah Division* of Fish and Game and Wyoming Game and Fish Commission. Estimates of total numbers of visitors were supplied by the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service, and the Utah and Wyoming Highway Departments provided traffic-flow information for major highways in or near the study area. *Formerly "Department" Data Analysis
Field forms were designed so that data could be coded readily and punched on data processing cards. Creel-census data analysis, digit counts, and some statistical tests were done on a IBM 1620 computer. Other data processing was done on an IBM 082 sorter. Much of the final analysis was done on a desk calculator. Statistical significance of results expressed as percentages were tested with chi-square tests and those expressed as means were tested with t-tests, both at the 5-percent level. In all instances where statistical significance is not mentioned, no tests were made.
FIGURE 9.--Typical facilities at the Deep Creek Campground, Ashley National Forest, 1963. Nine Forest Service campgrounds were operative in 1963. Facilities were improved and expanded during 1964 and 1965.
10 FACILITIES
(Table 1; figures 9-13)
In 1963, permanent recreation facilities included 9 campgrounds, 3 picnic areas, 3 viewpoints, 2 boat ramps and 1 visitor center. By 1965, facilities had been improved and additional permanent facilities included 6 campgrounds, 1 viewpoint, 6 boat ramps and 2 visitor centers.
During 1963, the campgrounds nearer the main highway received the heaviest use. They were not overcrowded. In 1964 and 1965, the areas nearer the water received the heaviest use and were frequently crowded.
TO U.S. 30
FLAMING GORGE 0 5 RESERVOIR
UNIT I
WY°
UNIT 2 UTAH
25 Dutch John
24 Dam
19 13 20
TO U.S. 40
FIGURE 107-Location of recreation sites, roads, streams and fishing units in the Flaming Gorge study area.
11 - FIGURE Ur Concrete-block pit toilet, typical of national forest campgrounds, Greendale Campground, Ashley National Forest, 1965.
— FIGURE 124 Rest room facility with sinks, flush-toilets and electricity was completed by the National Park Service at the Lucerne Valley campground and picnic area in 1965.
12 TABLE 1.--Status of recreational facilities, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965. (UP - Usable all year, permanent; PP - Usable part of the year, permanent; UT - Usable all year, temporary; PT - Usable part of year, temporary)
Year Map Reference Facility 1963 1964 1965
Campgrounds 1 Buckboard - PT UT 2 Squaw Hollow - PT UT 3 Lucerne Valley - UT UP 27 Antelope Flat - UT UT 9 Carmel UP UP PP 10 Moenkopi UP UP PP 11 Palisade UP UP PP 13 Deep Creek UP UP PP 17 Green's Lake UP UP UP 19 Skull Creek UP UP UP 22 Greendale UP UP UP 7 Sheep Creek Gap UT UT UT 23 Cedar Springs UP UP UP 25 Overflow - - UP 25 Mustang Ridge UT UT UP 26 Jarvies Canyon (boat camp) - UP UP 18 Gooseneck (boat camp) - UP UP 14 Hideout Canyon (boat camp) - UP UP Picnic areas 11 Palisade UP UP PP 16 Red Canyon UP UP UP 25 Canyon Glen UP UP UP Visitor Centers Dam (north) UP UP UP Dam (south) - UP UP Red Canyon - - PP Viewpoints Dam (north) UP UP UP Dam (east) - PP UP Dam (south) UT UP UP 16 Red Canyon UP UP UP Dowd Mountain - UT UT
13 TABLE 1.-- (Continued)
Year Map Reference Facility 1963 1964 1965
Boat ramps (Study Unit 1) Firehole - _ PP 1 Buckboard - PP PP 2 Squaw Hollow - - PP 3 Lucerne Valley - PP PP 27 Antelope Flat - PP PP 6 Sheep Creek Bay (Study Unit 1) Brinegar Ranch - PP PP 23 Cedar Springs UP UP UP 25 Dutch John Draw PP PP UP Bathing beaches 27 Antelope Flat - PP PP 3 Lucerne Valley - - PP Streams 4 Henry's Fork 8 Sheep Creek 15 Carter Creek 20 Cart Creek 24 Green River Other areas 5 Flaming Gorge 6 Sheep Creek Bay 12 Summit Springs Ranger Station 21 Greendale Junction
FIGURE 137-longest boat ramp at Flaming Gorge Reservoir and the only one usable at all water levels throughout the 3-year study period, Cedar Springs Recreation Area, Ashley National Forest, 1963. 14 RECREATIONAL USE
According to the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service, the study area hosted an estimated 231,065 visits during 1963 (table 2). In 1964, the area attracted an estimated 521,843 visits and in 1965 there were 786,103 visits. The rate of increase in number of visits was greater in the Park Service area (figure 14); however, the Forest Service portion had twice the number of visitors during 1964 and 1965.
TABLE 2.--Number of visits to the study area, 1963-1965
Thousands of Visits
Year Forest Service Area Park Service Area Totals
1963 191 40 231 1964 354 167 521 1965 512 274 786
- FIGURE 14. -Total number of visits to Flaming Gorge study area estimated by the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service, 1963-1965.
Responses to questions asked in the interview schedule and mailed questionnaire are summarized in Appendices D and H.
15 Origin of Visitors
Party spokesmen were asked to provide data concerning the party's residence. When the party contained persons from more than one location, all origins represented were noted. Reference to party origin is expressed as the percentage of parties containing people from various places. Many visiting parties contained people from more than one city and often from more than one State. As a result, the sums of percentages often exceed 100.
In 1963 the parties interviewed came from 30 States and 3 foreign countries (Canada, England and Pakistan). Sixty-eight percent of the visiting parties included people from Utah and 14 percent contained people from Wyoming. Utah residents were present in 82 percent of the visiting parties in 1964 and 1965 (table 3).
TABLE 3.--Origin of visitors, 1963-1965
Percent of Visitors Present in Parties Year Utah Wyoming Colorado California Other 1963 68 14 6 6 16 1964 82 16 6 4 13 1965 82 12 7 6 9
People from the metropolitan Salt Lake City area (230 miles away) were present in the largest share of visiting parties each year (table 4). Additional data on local sources of visitors are given in appexdix C.
TABLE 4.--Percent of parties having visitors from large cities
Year Salt Lake City 2.0igla Denver Totals 1963 32 12 2 46 1964 42 15 2 59 1965 41 18 3 62
Purpose of Visit and Activities
The percentage of parties coming exclusively to visit the study area was about the same each year: 75 percent in 1963; 82 percent in 1964; and 80 percent in 1965. The remaining parties either stopped briefly while traveling or included the study area as a joint visit with Dinosaur National Monument or other nearby areas.
16 Over half of the parties in 1963 came primarily to sight-see (table 5, appendix C). In 1964 and 1965 fishing was the most popular primary purpose of the visits, while sight-seeing was second.
TABLE 5.--Primary purpose of party visits, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965--expressed as percentage of all parties interviewed each year
Primary purpose Year of visit 1963 1964 1965
Fishing 6 42 37 Sight-seeing 56 37 36 Camping 8 6 9 Hunting 5 4 7 Boating 10 5 5 5 2 2 Water skiing 2/ B sinessi/ A u 1 2 Picnicking 4 2 1 Swimming 1 0 1 Nature study 2 0 0 Photography 1 0 0 Other 2 0 1
1/ Parties which came for business reasons but also took part in recreational activities while at the study area. 2/ Less than 0.5 percent.
In addition to pursuing the primary purpose of visit, members of most parties engaged in many other types of activities while on the study area. In 1963, 74 percent of the visiting parties contained members who participated in sight-seeing, 41 percent in camping and 32 percent in photography (table 6). In 1964, when fishing replaced sight-seeing as the major purpose of visit, sight-seeing remained the foremost activity with 76 percelt of the visiting parties containing people who participated. Fishing was the second-most activity represented (71 percent), followed by camping (54 percent), and photography (52 percent). In 1965, sight-seeing remained the most popular activity, with 91 percent of the parties containing participants. Fishing again was second (75 percent), camping third (69 percent), and photography fourth (62 percent).
17 TABLE 6.--Activities of visting parties, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965 -- expressed as percentage of parties containing individuals participating in various activities during their visits each year
Year
Activity 1963 1964 1965
Sight-seeing 74 76 91 Fishing 16 71 75 Camping 41 54 69 Photography 32 52 62 Picnicking 17 29 44 Hiking 12 29 Boating 19 25 27 Sunbathing 1 11 19 Swimming 4 14 18 Nature study 6 8 14 Water skiing 10 12 9 Hunting 6 5 9 Other 4 2 2
FIGURE 15.--Visitors engaging in activities incidental to primary purposes of visit.
18 Party Size
The average size of the visiting parties during the study period was 5.5 people (table 7). The differences between the means for each of the 3 years were not statistically significant. Table 7 also includes data on the number of vehicles per party, number of persons per vehicle and the length of stay. Length of stay was expressed in 0.25-day units. Visits of 4 hours or less were classified as 0.25 day; over 4 and up to 8 hours as 0.50 day; over 8 hours but not overnight as 0.75 day; and overnight stays as 1.00 day. Visits lasting several days were expressed as the number of nights spent at the study area. Mean length of stay was computed using procedures for obtaining an unbiased estimate outlined by Lucas (1963). Sampling was done without the replacement required by this method, but the resultant bias toward underestimation was small.
TABLE 7.--Size of parties and length of stay
Year Average Size Vehicles/Party Persons/Vehicle Length of Stay
1963 5.20 1.29 4.03 0.50 1964 5.43 1.43 3.78 0.55 1965 5.82 1.45 4.00 0.87
Previous Visits and Party Composition
In 1963, 54 percent of the parties contained someone who had been to the area in previous years. The percentages were approximately the same in 1964 (52 percent) and in 1965 (60 percent). Differences were not statistically significant. The percentage of parties containing someone who had visited the area more than once during the year varied from 29 to 36 percent, and differences were not significant.
Less than half of all parties (44 percent) contained members of more than one family in 1963. In 1964 (56 percent) and 1965 (59 percent) more than half the visiting parties contained more than one family. Ali differences were significant.
Camping
Parties which did not camp within the study area used commercial lodging facilities, stayed with residents, stayed at their awn summer homes in or within 50 miles of the study area, or camped outside, but near the study area.
19 Each succeeding year a greater proportion of visitors camped in the study area. In 1963, 58 percent of the visiting parties stayed overnight in or within 50 miles of the study area, and 41 percent camped within the study area. In 1964 the percentage of parties which stayed overnight in or near the area was 62 percent, and 54 percent camped within the study area. In 1965, 76 percent of the parties stayed overnight, and 69 percent camped within the study area. The increased percentage of visitors staying overnight was significant.
Since nearly one-half of the visiting parties camped within the study area in 1963, a question on type of equipment they used was added to the interview schedule in 1964._ For simplicity, all types of house trailers used by vacationers were classified as travel trailers, all truckmounted sleeping or living units were classified as truckcampers, and all collapsible trailers with fabric sides were referred to as tent trailers.
In 1964, 65 percent of the parties which camped within the study area used a single type of camping unit, and the remaining 35 percent used a combination of types within the party (table 8). In 1965 more
TABLE 8.--Types of accommodations used by camping parties, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1964-1965--expressed as percentage
Year Item 1964 1965
Percentage of camping parties using one type of accommodation 65 78 Percentage of camping parties using two or more types of accommodations 35 22 Percentage of camping parties using the following types of accommodations"
Travel trailer 29 40 Truck camper 35 37 Tent 39 36 Vehicle 11 6 Outdoors without shelter 6 3 Tent trailer 2 2 Outdoors with shelter 0 1 Boat 2 1
1/ Sums are greater than 10070 since some parties used more than one type of accommodation.
20 visitors camped with the comforts of home and used more "mobile apartments" in the form of travel trailers and truckcampers than in 1964.
No significant changes were found during the 3-year period in places that visiting parties stayed the night before arriving at the study area. Seventy percent drove directly from home, 10 percent stayed in the Vernal area, 3 percent stayed overnight at Dinosaur National Monument, and 2 percent stayed in the nearby Uinta Mountains.
Alternate Choices
During the last 3 weeks of the 1965 interview period, the questions asking what improvements or changes were desired and what visitors liked best about the area were replaced with the following questions: "How much more money would you be willing to spend to come to the Flaming Gorge Recreation Area than you did on this trip?" and "If Flaming Gorge Reservoir had not been built, where would you have gone on this trip?"
Fifty-six parties answered some or all of these questions. Eleven percent indicated that they would not have been willing to spend any more money to pay a visit than they did on this trip (table 9).
TABLE 9.--Relative amount of additional money that visiting parties would have been willing to spend to come again to the Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1965
Percentage of expenditures that parties would have been Percentage willing to spend additionally of-parties
Nothing 11
1-10 21 11-20 16 21-30 12 31-50 16 51-75 2 76-100 4 Over 100 7
No answer 11
21 Ninety-eight percent of the parties answered the question about where else they might have gone. Of those answering, 48 percent said they would have gone somewhere else, 34 percent stated that they would have come to the area anyway (most of these were deer hunting parties), and 16 percent said they would have stayed home.
Traffic Patterns
Postal card returns ranged from 44 to 87 percent for U.S. Route 30 and 46 to 92 percent for Route 40. Table 10 gives the percent of postal card contacts from the two highways which visited the study area. The increases for U.S. Route 40 were significant.
During the study period traffic on the 2 U.S. routes increased about 10 percent.
TABLE 10.--Percent of visitors from traffic sampled on the 2 major highways
Year U.S. Route 30 U.S. Route 40
1963 2 17 1964 6 34 1965 7 53
A comparison of the vehicle licenses observed on Utah Highway 44 with data from the party interviews revealed a close similarity. It appeared that either method could be used to obtain valid data on the State origins of parties.
The mean numbers of passenger vehicles passing the Route 44 checkpoint per daylight hour are given in table 11.
TABLE 11.--Mean number of passenger vehicles per daylight hour on Route 44, 1964-1965
Year June July August September Average
1964 18.8 39.7 41.8 18.7 29.7 1965 17.0 34.2 46.1 13.1 27.6
Use by Local Residents
Residents of Sweetwater County, Wyoming, and Daggett and Uintah Counties in Utah were considered local residents and were present in about one-fourth of the parties interviewed. Data concerning use of
22 the study area by local residents were obtained by mail survey (appendix D). Data on the use of recreational sites are given in table 12. The responses to the mail questionnaire are summarized in appendix E.
TABLE 12.--Use of recreational sites by local parties, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965--expressed as percentage of households which answered questionnaire and visited Flaming Gorge each year
Year Recreation site visited 1963 1964 1965
Squaw Hollow 24 36 36 Buckboard Crossing 13 29 35 Lucerne Valley 20 32 35 Viewpoints at dam 43 49 32 Antelope Flat 8 22 29 Cedar Springs 12 17 21 Red Canyon 22 28 20 Boat camps *1/ 19 18 Dutch John Draw 24 22 17 Green's Lake 23 25 14 Palisade Campground - picnic area 18 13 13 Carmel Campground 6 6 6 Skull Creek 4 6 6 Greendale Campground 10 9 5 Moenkopi Campground 6 4 4 Deep Creek Campground 8 10 3 Other 22 9 9
1/ Less than 0.5 PEC CENT
23 Angler Success
Rainbow trout fingerlings were stocked in the reservoir during each of the 3 years of this study, and rainbows made up over 99 percent of the catch in 1964 and 1965. Kokanee salmon fingerlings were stocked in 1963 and 1964, but none was found in creel checks. An occasional cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki), carp (Cyprinus carpio), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), or brown trout (Salmo trutta) was taken by anglers.
Percentage of anglers with fish
In 1964, 84 percent of the angling parties on the r eservoir had fish when contacted (table 14). The mean percentage of angling parties with fish in possession when contacted in 1965 was 93 pe rcent.
TABLE 14.--Angler success 1/in Flaming Gorge Reservoir, 1964-1965 -- expressed as percentage of parties with fish, average length of fish, and number of fish caught per hour
Reservoir Area
Year and Item Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Combined
1964 Percentage of fishing parties with fish 75 84 94 84 84 Average length of fish--inches 12.17 11.83 11.09 9.84 11.16 Number of fish caught per angler hour 0.74 1.22 1.66 1.17 1.24
1965 Percentage of fishing parties with fish 88 92 99 93 93 Average length of fish--inches 12.16 11.84 11.35 10.47 11.24 Number of fish caught per angler hour 0.99 1.17 1.69 1.40 1.33
1/ Rainbow trout catch
Catch rate
The average catch rate for the reservoir was 1.24 fish per angler- hour in 1964 and 1.33 in 1965. Differences between catch rates for weekend and weekday anglers were not significant either year. Differences in catch rates for bait fishermen and those using artif icial lures were not significant either year.
26 During 1965 an additional question was added to the creel-census form to record number of fish caught and released. Fourteen percent of the parties reported that they had released fish, and the number released was estimated to be 11 percent of those kept. If fish released are in- cluded, the mean catch rate was actually 1.47 fish per angler-hour.
Differences in catch rates between boat and shore anglers were highly significant each year. In 1964, boat anglers caught 1.46 fish per hour and shore fishermen, 0.79. In 1965, the catch rate was 1.64 for boat fishermen and 1.17 for shore anglers. Anglers fishing through the ice in 1965 caught 1.12 fish per hour.
Catch rates improved in both years for parties which fished the reservoir more often and became familiar with the lake. In 1964, parties which had not fished the reservoir previously that year caught 0.81 fish per hour, those which had fished from one to five times previously caught 1.05, and those which had fished more than five times previously in the year caught 1.48 trout per angler hour. In 1965, anglers fishing in the reservoir for the first time had a catch rate of 1.07, those who had fished from one to five times previously, 1.27, and anglers who had fished more than five times previously during the year had a catch rate of 1.70 fish per hour. Differences between catch rates of anglers who fished five times or less and those who fished more than five times were statistically significant.
Other catch-rate comparisons were made in 1965. Parties which had fished less than 2 hours when contacted had a catch rate of 1.77 fish per hour, those who fished from 2 to 5 hours had a catch rate of 1.38, and anglers who fished longer than 5 hours had caught rainbow trout at the rate of 0.76 fish per hour. These differences were statistically significant. Angling parties containing youngsters under 13 years old had caught 1.07 fish per angler hour and those without youngsters, 1.47 fish per hour - a significant difference. No significant differences were found for catch rates among anglers beginning to fish at various times of the day, among parties coming to the study area for various primary purposes, among anglers coming from different States or local areas, nor between those who fished for interrupted or uninterrupted periods.
Mean Length of Fish Caught
The average total length of trout caught in the reservoir was 11.2 inches in 1964 and 1965 (table 14). Unit 1 produced the larger fish (average 12.2 inches) and Unit 4 produced the smaller fish (9.8 inches, 1964; 10.5 inches, 1965).
27 Fish Condition
Condition factors (K) of rainbow trout Age Groups II-IV were 1.11 - 1.48 in 1963, 1.01 - 1.19 in 1964, and 0.99 - 1.98 in 1965 (Eiserman et al, 1965). Anglers began to comment about the poorer condition of fish late in 1964. Trout from the canyon areas were in noticeably poorer condition throughout 1965 and several angling parties stated that they had moved into the desert portions to catch plumper fish.
Types of Lures Used
The types of lures used by fishermen were similar in 1964 and 1965. Most anglers on Flaming Gorge Reservoir used bait (71 percent). The most popular offerings were angleworms (42 percent), cheese (22 percent), and marshmallows (16 percent). Salmon eggs and corn were legal baits in 1965 and were used by 10 percent of the angling parties. Angleworms, cheese and grubs were the most popular among winter fishermen. Anglers using artificial lures preferred metal lures (48 percent) to plugs (26 percent) and flies (9 percent). Fly fishermen were not numerous anywhere on the reservoir.
Seasonal Fishing Patterns
During January-March 1964, fishing at the reservoir was restricted on ice fishing in Units 1 and 2. Fishing from the bank or from boats was done throughout the reservoir from May through October. Almost no fishing was done in Units 3 and 4 during this time. During November and December a limited amount of open-water angling was done in Unit 2 and some ice fishing was done in Unit 1. The seasonal pattern of angling in the reservoir in 1965 was similar to that observed in 1964.
Factors Influencing Geographical Distribution of Anglers
Anglers selected a particular area to fish for four major reasons: ease of access; someone else's suggestion; caught fish there previously (familiarity with the area); or because the spot looked good (table 15).
28 TABLE 15.--Reasons given for selecting a particular portion of Flaming Gorge Reservoir on which to fish, 1964-1965 -- expressed as percentage of all angling parties contacted each year
Year Reason 1964 1965
Easy to get there 24 30 Caught fish there before 19 24 Someone else suggested it 19 23 Good-looking spot 30 16 Saw others fishing there 3 2 Calm water 2 2 Publicity 1 1 Don't know 1 0 Other or unknown 1 2
Knowledge of area
In 1964, angling parties contacted in the two desert units were asked if they had seen the canyon portion, and anglers in the canyons were asked if they had seen the desert portion. Over two-thirds of the parties fishing Units 2 and 3 (Utah desert and adjacent open canyon) indicated they had seen the other portion. Of those parties fishing the two extreme ends of the reservoir (Units 1 and 4), approximately one-third had seen the other portion. In 1965, 88 percent of the anglers fishing the open canyon (Unit 3) had seen the desert portion. In adjacent Unit 2, 76 percent said they had seen the canyon portion. Of those who fished Unit 4, 53 percent reported they had seen the desert portion, and 48 percent of the angling parties contacted in Unit 1 had seen either of the more distant canyon portions (Units 3 and 4).
Regulations
Because Flaming Gorge Reservoir lies within two States, it was anticipated that problems concerning licensing of anglers and boat registration might influence angler distribution. To a limited extent, fishing license limitations had an influence upon angler distribution near the State line, with Utah anglers tending to adhere to the Utah side and Wyoming fishermen staying on their side of the line. The influence was offset somewhat, however, by the creation of reciprocal fishing stamps, which allowed Utah and Wyoming fishing license holders to fish on either side of the State line.
29 State boating laws in Utah and Wyoming honored boat registration from any other State for a 90-day period each year. Thus, boat registration laws did not affect the distribution of anglers.
Weather
The pattern of ice formation on the reservoir dictated where and when ice fishing was done since all access points for summer anglers also were open to winter fishermen. During the open-water season, the majority of boat fishermen from Lucerne Valley stayed in Henry's Fork Bay and along the west side of the reservoir, whereas boaters from Antelope Flat fished in all parts of the unit. The main reason for this pattern was the dominant northwesterly wind, which resulted in the western shoreline being more protected. The wind also caused a few boaters to cruise down into Unit 3 to fish between the narrow canyon walls. Some bank fishermen with intentions to fish at Antelope Flat moved down to Unit 4 when strong winds blew on the desert portion.
Turbidity of the Green River and major tributaries in April and May played a role in angler distribution each spring. - Although anglers who fished in the turbid bays, stream mouths, and upper part of the reservoir in early spring had fair success, the turbidity discouraged many of them.
High summer temperature had no discernible influence upon distribution of fishermen. Although campers moved into forested higher elevations during hot weather, the fishing pattern did not change.
Fishery resource
Since the area now occupied by the reservoir and lower tributaries was treated with rotenone to remove fish prior to impoundment in late 1962, only stocked game fish attracted anglers during the study period. Rainbow trout were well distributed throughout the reservoir. Distribution of fish, therefore, did not influence distribution of anglers. During 1964 and 1965, however, the average length of fish had a limited influence upon angler preference of fishing site. Three percent of the anglers contacted indicated they were fishing in a given spot because the fish were bigger and nearly all of these anglers were at Antelope Flat. A large proportion of parties which listed "someone else suggested it" as the reason for fishing at Antelope Flat fished there because they were told the fish were larger there than at the dam.
30 SINCE THE CONDITION FACTOR OF THE FISH CAUGHT IN 1964 HELD UP THROUGHOUT MOST OF THE YEAR IN ALL PARTS OF THE RESERVOIR, IT WAS NOT A FACTOR INFLUENCING ANGLER DISTRIBUTION THAT YEAR. BY 1965, HOWEVER, THE POORER CONDITION OF THE TROUT CAUGHT IN THE CANYON PORTION BEGAN TO INFLUENCE SOME ANGLING PARTIES TO MOVE TO THE DESERT PORTION.
BOAT RAMP LOCATION
ANGLERS IN BOATS TENDED TO FISH IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE LAUNCHING SITES USED. SEVENTY-SIX PERCENT OF THE FISHERMEN WHO LAUNCHED FROM THE CEDAR SPRINGS BOAT RAMP FISHED IN THAT UNIT (UNIT 4). FIFTY-EIGHT PERCENT FISHED WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE DAM, 18 PERCENT BETWEEN 5 AND 10 MILES UP THE CANYONS, AND 23 PERCENT BETWEEN 10 AND 20 MILES AWAY. PARTIES LAUNCHING FROM DUTCH JOHN DRAW AND SHEEP CREEK BAY FISHED WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE BOAT RAMPS USED. EIGHTY PERCENT OF THE BOAT FISHERMEN WHO LAUNCHED FROM ANTELOPE FLAT FISHED WITHIN THE BAY BETWEEN ANTELOPE FLAT AND LUCERNE VALLEY AND WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE RAMPS, AND 16 PERCENT FISHED IN UNIT 3. ANGLERS WHO LAUNCHED ACROSS THE RESERVOIR AT LUCERNE VALLEY MOVED FARTHER. FORTY-TWO PERCENT REMAINED IN THE BAY WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE RAMP, 22 PERCENT FISHED IN THE OPEN CANYON OF UNIT 3 BETWEEN FLAMING GORGE AND HIDEOUT CANYON, 16 PERCENT WENT INTO UNIT 1, AND 13 PERCENT FISHED IN THE LOWER END OF UNIT 3. MOST ANGLERS WHO LAUNCHED ON THE WYOMING DESERT PORTION FISHED WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE SITE USED FOR LAUNCHING.
NEARLY HALF OF THE BOAT FISHERMEN IN UNIT 1 (48 PERCENT) LAUNCHED THEIR BOATS IN UNIT 2 AT LUCERNE VALLEY. EQUAL PERCENTAGES (24 PERCENT) LAUNCHED FROM SQUAW HOLLOW AND BUCKBOARD, AND THE REMAINING 5 PERCENT LAUNCHED AT OTHER ACCESS POINTS IN UNIT 1. FIFTY-EIGHT PERCENT OF THE PARTIES FISHING FROM BOATS IN UNIT 2 LAUNCHED AT ANTELOPE FLAT AND 41 PERCENT AT LUCERNE VALLEY. FORTY PERCENT OF THE BOAT PARTIES IN UNIT 3 LAUNCHED AT LUCERNE VALLEY, 36 PERCENT AT CEDAR SPRINGS, 20 PERCENT AT ANTELOPE FLAT, AND 4 PERCENT AT SHEEP CREEK BAY, THE ONLY LAUNCHING SITE IN UNIT 3. NINETY-FIVE PERCENT OF THE BOAT PARTIES IN UNIT 4 LAUNCHED AT CEDAR SPRINGS, AND 4 PERCENT FROM DUTCH JOHN DRAW.
CAMPINZ AND PICNIC FACILITIES
DEVELOPMENT OF FACILITIES ON THE DESERT PORTION APPEARED TO HAVE PLAYED AN IMPORTANT PART IN DETERMINING ANGLER DISTRIBUTION. TEMPORARY FACILITIES WERE FIRST SET UP AT LUCERNE VALLEY AND ANTELOPE FLAT IN 1964 AND WERE USED MORE EXTENSIVELY BY ANGLERS THAN WERE ACCESS POINTS FARTHER NORTH. IN 1965 THE FIRST PERMANENT FACILITIES WERE
31 completed by the National Park Service at Lucerne Valley, and the Antelope Flat temporary facilities were greatly enlarged. Both were used by large numbers of angling parties as bases of operation. Increasing numbers of Wyoming residents and out-of-staters began to use other temporary facilities on the desert in Unit 1 during 1965. Facility location in Unit 1, therefore, probably played a greater part in determining angler distribution than did party origin. Camping and picnicking facilities in the forested portion of the study area had little influence upon where anglers fished.
Access
Bank fishermen gained access to the desert portion of the reservoir from many points on the west side and from the Antelope Flat area on the east. As a result, bank fishermen were well distributed and thinly scattered along the shore in Units 1 and 2. In Unit 3, access by bank fishermen was limited to the Sheep Creek Bay area, resulting in a concentration of bank fishermen. The construction of Hideout Canyon boat camp in 1965 spread the fishermen in Unit 3 and enabled bank anglers to get to another area.
In Unit 4, bank fishermen found access near the dam, Cart Creek Bay, Cedar Springs, and Dutch John Draw. Fishermen began to use the boat camps at Jarvies Draw and Gooseneck in 1965 which enabled them to fish from share at two additional locations in the canyon.
Location of marinas
Marina location had an influence upon where anglers renting small boats fished. Since the use of small boats was limited by proximity to protecting lee shores and restricted fuel supplies, most angling from rented boats took place within 5 miles of marinas at Cedar Springs and Lucerne Valley.
Characteristics of Angling Parties
Data from interview schedules and creel-census forms completed by angling parties were utilized to describe several characteristics of angling parties. If a visiting party contained anyone who fished on the study area, it was classed as an angling party. Many angling parties, therefore, contained persons who did not fish. Each party claimed only one place of origin and me primary purpose of visit.
32 Orizin
Twenty-eight percent of the local parties who visited the area in 1963 contained one or more persons who fished. Fishing was the major activity of parties from Daggett County, 82 percent of which contained persons who fished. The majority of parties fishing in tributaries and in Green's Lake in 1963 were from Ogden (42 percent) and Salt Lake City (27 percent) metropolitan areas. Local Utah parties (Daggett and Uintah counties) made up 19 percent, and Wyoming parties comprised 8 percent.
In 1964, 74 percent of the parties fishing Unit 1 were from Wyoming cities within 50 miles (table 16). Most of the parties (56-84 percent) fishing the other three units were from the Salt Lake City and Ogden areas.
TABLE 16.--Origin of angling parties which fished each unit of Flaming Gorge Reservoir, 1964-1965 -- expressed as percentage of parties contacted in each unit
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4
Party origin 1964 1965 1964 1965 1964 1965 1964 1965
Salt Lake City area 7 4 36 38 36 51 55 48 Ogden area 3 4 20 19 21 33 14 9 Provo area 0 0 5 3 4 2 6 7 Vernal area 0 0 15 9 19 5 10 13 Dutch John-Manila 0 0 6 5 4 1 3 3 Other Utah 0 0 6 6 3 7 4 9 Southwest Wyoming 74 60 4 2 2 0 0 0 Other Wyoming 9 12 1 0 1 0 0 0 Colorado 1 9 5 8 5 1 2 4 California 1 4 1 4 2 0 4 3 Other States 5 7 1 6 3 0 2 4
Percentage of angling parties residing within 50 miles of reservoir. 74 60 25 16 24 6 13 16
33 Purpose of visit
The percentage of angling parties coming primarily to fish decreased from the upper to the lower part of the reservoir. In Unit 1, 93 percent were chiefly interested in fishing; in Unit 2, 73 percent came primarily to fish; in Unit 3 it was 61 percent; and in Unit 4, 48 percent.
Fishing was not the primary purpose of visit for many fishing parties (table 17).
TABLE 17.--Degree of participation in fishing by parties which came for a different primary purpose, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963- 1965 -- expressed as percentage of parties which came for each primary purpose and contained members who fished during the visit
Percentage of parties con- taining people who fished during the visit.
Primary purpose Year of visit 1963 1964 1965
Water skiing 0 93 100 Boating 2 81 90 Camping 36 68 87 Business 0 67 78 Hunting 15 54 70 Sight-seeing 8 40 48 Swimming 0 - 33 Picnicking 0 60 0 Photography 0 20 Nature study 0 Other 11 - 75
Party size
Mean size of fishing parties, expressed as number of people in the party who actually fished, varied among units. In 1965, for instance, parties in Unit 3 averaged 3.8 people; in Unit 2, 3.6 people; in Unit 4, 3.2; and in Unit 1, 2.8 people. Party size also differed among boat and shore anglers. Shore fishing parties averaged 3.1 people; boat parties, 3.6 people; and parties fishing both from shore
34 and from boats, 6.2 people. The mean number of people actually fishing per party that year was 3.4. Twenty-three percent of the people in fishing parties, however, did not fish. Hence, number of people per fishing party, regardless of primary purpose of visit, was 4.4.
Age composition
The age-composition of parties fishing at the reservoir varied among units. In 1964, fishing parties in the canyons were predominantly young adults (below 40 years of age) and youngsters. In Unit 1, higher percentages of people over 60 years of age were found than in any other unit and lower percentages of young adults and children. Adults between 40 and 60 years old were about equally distributed in all units.
Parental influence
More than half of the visitors interviewed had parents who fished, and a slightly higher percentage of local residents said their parents had been sport fishermen. Over 90 percent of the local residents responding to the mailed questionnaire reported that they had fished somewhere in the last 10 years, and more than 80 percent of the local households contained at least one other member who had fished in the past decade (Appendix E).
Miscellaneous characteristics
The Salt Lake City and Ogden areas, which contributed 59 percent of the-visiting parties in 1965, had the highest percentages of parties fishing at the study area (88 percent). More than 80 percent of Utah and Wyoming parties contained persons who fished while visiting the study area in 1965; 71 percent of those from California; 63 percent of the Colorado parties; and 48 percent of the parties from all other States contained anglers. Thirty-seven percent of the parties visiting on days-off had members who fished, and 67-100 percent of parties visiting during other types of leisure time held fishermen. Of visitors with less than a high school education, 76 and 82 percent fished in 1964 and 1965 whereas of the college graduates, 54 and 67 percent fished each respective year.
Percentage Fishing Elsewhere
The percentage of parties fishing in lower sections of tributaries diminished each year as the reservoir fishery developed. During 1963, 15 percent of the parties fished in tributaries. In 1964,
35 the percentage dropped to 9 percent, and in 1965, it declined to 2 . percent. The percentage of parties fishing in Green's Lake each year, however, remained at 1 percent.
The percentage of parties which also had fished in lakes or streams in the nearby Uinta Mountains while on their trips to Flaming Gorge ranged from 2 to 4 percent. Since total numbers of visitors to the study area increased each year, numbers of anglers using adjacent areas also increased proportionately.
Reasons Why Parties Did Not Fish
The major reasons why parties did not fish were that they didn't come to the reservoir to fish or that they weren't fishermen (table 18).
TABLE 18.--Reasons given for not fishing in the reservoir, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965 -- expressed as percentage of parties which did not fish in the reservoir each year
Year
Reason 1963 1964 1965
Came for another purpose 42 45 35 Don't fish 15 22 26 Didn't have time 4 12 21 Didn't bring tackle 2 10 10 Too much trouble to get a license 1 5 3 Heard fishing was poor 0 1 1 Too windy 0 1 0 1/ License fee too high * 1 0 Heard season closed2/ 35 0 0 Unknown 0 1 1 Other * 2 3
1/ Less than 1 percent. 2/ The season was closed on the Utah side in 1963.
Data on numbers of fishing licenses sold in the local 3-county area were obtained from Utah and Wyoming (table 19).
36 TABLE 19.--Local fishing license sales
Sweetwater Co. Daggett Co. Uintah Co. Year Wyoming Utah Utah
1962 4,516 691 5,545 1963 4,410 404 5,017 1964 6,308 2,228 6,079 Reservoir 827 449 17 Stamps, 1964
The 2-dollar reservoir stamp permitted residents of Utah or Wyoming to fish in the nonresident portion of the reservoir.
ECONOMIC VALUES
The economic value of the recreational use of the study area to local communities was estimated by two categories: 1) visitor expenditures and 2) new businesses established during the study period.
Visitor Expenditures
Questions regarding party expenditures per visit in or within 50 miles of the study area were asked in the interview schedule in 1964 and 1965. Estimated amount spent by visitors at and within 50 miles of the study area was $611,339 in 1964 and $1,443,049 in 1965 (table 20).
TABLE 20.--Visitor expenditures
1964 1965
Spent $ totally within study area 44% 56% Spent $ totally within 50 mile radius 39% 44% Spent no money 6% Mean spent per party visit $6.34 $10.66 Visitor expenditunas within 50 mile radius $611,339 $1,443,049
The average daily expenditure per visitor at the study area, or within 50 miles, was $2.13 in 1964 and $2.11 in 1965, (table 21). People coming on business or for sight-seeing spent the most ($2.46-$4.40 per day) and those who came for picnicking the least ($0.50-$1.32 per day).
37 TABLE 21.--Mean daily expenditures by each visitor, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1964-1965 -- expressed as mean expenditure within 50 miles of the study area by primary purpose of party visit each year
Mean amount spent per person per day
Primary purpose of party visit 1964 1965
Water skiing $0.73 $2.14 Camping 1.05 1.09 Fishing 1.63 1.94 Hunting 2.21 2.14 Swimming 0.00 4.76 Sight-seeing 4.05 3.55 Business 4.40 2.46 Boating 1.43 1.23 Picnicking 0.50 1.32 Other 2.31 3.88
Annual mean expenditure per person per day. 2.13 2.11
Private Businesses
During 1963 one concessionnaire operated at Cedar Springs and offered jet-powered boats and operators for hire during July and August. Two lodges offered overnight accommodations, groceries, and gasoline.
In 1964, two small grocery stores were opened within the study area, the two lodges added accommodations, two businesses rented boat - and trailer-storage and one marina (a new business) opened. The jet-boat service was discontinued when the new marina opened.
Early in 1965 another marina began operation at Lucerne Valley and a third was under construction at Antelope Flat, but was not completed in time for the 1965 recreation season. The new marina at Lucerne Valley Also included a small snack shop and grocery store. A riding stable was established near one lodge in 1965, and another concessionnaire sold firewood in several Forest Service campgrounds. One new gasoline service station opened in Manila during the summer.
38 The increased road construction, increased number of business firms, increased tourist volume, and expansion of established businesses all indicated that the local economy had been improved as a result of the recreation opportunities afforded by Flaming Gorge Reservoir.
VISITOR SATISFACTION
Data concerning the satisfaction of visitors with conditions and facilities at the study area were obtained from the attitude page of the interview schedule, from the questions on the personal information sheet in the interview schedule and from responses on the questionnaire mailed to local residents.
Visitor Attitudes
Degree of visitor satisfaction on 17 items on the interview schedule attitude page (Appendix A) was given numerical values to allow evaluation and plotting on a quantitative scale (Remmers and Gage, 1955). The choices and corresponding numerical ratings were: Very Satisfactory -5; Satisfactory-4; Don't know or No Opinion-3: Slightly Unsatisfactory- 2; and Very unsatisfactory-1.
The single aspect of the study area which came nearest to being Very Satisfactory to all was "scenery", which varied from a mean of 4.87 to 4.96 on the satisfaction scale in all 3 years (table 22). Parking areas and weather rated consistently high each year. Wildlife, fishing, and boat-launching sites ranked near the middle of the scale in 1963 and made substantial gains each year. Items low on the scale included fish-cleaning stations, swimming areas, and concessions. Aspects of the study area which declined in visitor satisfaction from 1963 to 1965 were comfort stations, drinking water, shade trees, and fish-cleaning stations.
In 1963 visitors frequently answered, "Haven't seen any!", when asked for their opinions about the wildlife in the area even though chipmunks, ground squirrels, and several species of songbirds were in sight. Further investigation revealed that, when confronted with the question, the visitor's first reaction was to think of wildlife only as large creatures, such as deer, elk, moose, antelope and bear. Where the answer, "Haven't seen any!", was given, this was noted by the interviewer who then asked the visitor for his definition of wildlife. When required to stop and think about it, most visitors questioned included small mammals and birds as wildlife. In many instances, however, visitors had not heard the birds singing and were not aware that so many small creatures were all around them.
39 TABLE 22.--Visitor satisfaction, Flaming Gorge Study Area, 1963-1965 -- expressed as mean score for each subject on attitude page of interview schedule each year. (5.00 = highest rating; 1.00 = lowest rating)
Year
Subject 1963 1964 1965
Scenery 4.96 4.87 4.95 Parking areas 4.68 4.63 4.66 Weather 4.62 4.63 4.64 Camping areas 4.74 4.46 4.59 Access roads 4.32 4.62 4.58 Picnic sites 4.61 4.41 4.55 Wildlife 3.81 3.98 4.24 Boat launching 3.02 3.45 4.19 Comfort stations 4.39 3.78 4.18 Fishing 3.13 3.80 4.14 Officials contacted 3.32 3.29 3.96 Shade trees 4.73 4.11 3.93 Trails 3.00 3.63 3.65 Drinking water 4.05 3.18 3.61 Concessions 2.99 2.97 3.45 Swimming areas 2.99 3.09 3.38 Fish cleaning stations 3.00 2.64 2.84
Annual overall mean 3.91 3.86 4.09
Most of the visitors who saw and heard small wildlife could not identify them. Observations and interviews also disclosed that many anglers did not know one fish from another.
Visitor Opinions
Visitor satisfaction is derived partly from a fulfillment of needs and desires. An examination of what visitors liked at the study area was undertaken to gain insight regarding expectations of these urban and suburban residents when they engage in outdoor recreation. Visitors in 1964 and 1965 were asked to express their views on what they liked best about the area and what improvements or changes they would suggest.
40 Best liked by visitors
Items visitors liked best were grouped into four subject areas; natural environment; man-made environment; activities; and administration. In 1964 and 1965, 45-50 percent of the visitors liked the natural enviraLment best; 22-29 percent chose activities; 19-21 percent selected man-made environment; and 7 percent, administration of the area. Most highly favored aspect of the natural environment was the scenery (24 percent); of the man-made environment, facilities (12 percent); of activities, fishing (17 percent); and of administration, cleanliness (5 percent).
Differences in visitor opinions were found between the two geographical portions of the study area each year. The natural environment was rated lower by visitors on the desert (27-31 percent) than by those in the forested portion (49-56 percent). Conversely, the man-made environment was rated more favorably by desert visitors (25-26 percent) than by forest visitors (17-20 percent). Activities also were better liked on the desert (36-40 percent) than in the forest (18-27 percent). No differences were found in visitors' opinions regarding administration on either area.
Su ested improvements
Responses to the question about improvements or changes were grouped into the following four categories: facilities; concessions; access; and administration. Suggestions for improvements were similar in 1964 and 1965. Each year more than two-thirds of the parties suggested improvements in the facilities. Twenty-five percent specified camping facilities, 6-10 percent requested improvements in rest rooms and 4-5 percent requested more elaborate facilities, such as flush toilets, electric lights and outlets, food lockers, laundromats, and showers. Other suggestions for additional facilities included trees, shade, parking areas, picnic tables, boat ramps, and beaches.
In 1964, 12 percent of the parties requested more or better commercial concessions, specifically marinas and lodging facilities. In 1965, 6 percent requested improved concessions, but most named lodging facilities. Ten percent of the visitors requested improved administrative services each year including signs, information services, nature talks, tours of the dam, and garbage disposal. Improved roads and access were requested by 9-10 percent each year.
41 Suggestions for improvements or changes also differed between the desert and forest portions of the study area. Better facilties were requested by 78-87 percent of the parties contacted on the desert and by 60-64 percent of those in the forested portion. Most of the desert visitors wanted better rest rooms drinking water, picnic areas, boating facilities, shade and shade trees, whereas parties in the forest wanted improved camping and parking facilities. Improved commercial concessions were requested by 4-12 percent of the parties on the desert and by 7-12 percent in the forest. One- to two-percent of the desert visitors requested improved administrative services but 11-14 percent of the parties in the forest asked for such services, primarily information and sanitation. Desert visitors requested improved access roads less frequently (0-4 percent) then did forest users (11-15 percent), who wanted to get closer to the reservoir.
Local Resident Opinions
Opinions of local residents were obtained on the mailed questionnaire for 1963-1965. About half of the respondents (45-53 percent) thought the area was best suited to day-visits, 29-33 percent stated it was best for overnight trips, and 10-14 percent indicated it was best suited for lengthy vacations (appendix E). Two- to four- percent believed the area was overdeveloped and 62-67 percent thought it was underdeveloped. About 87 percent, each year, believed that the area was more valuable to outdoor recreation after the dam was con- structed and about 3-4 percent said it was more valuable before the dam was built. Each year more than 95 percent thought that recreation sites were easy to find, 81 to 89 percent said roads were generally good, and 79 to 82 percent believed that facilities were suitable at the recreation sites.
Nearly all local naspondents indicated that they believed the fishery in the reservoir was a definite improvement over what existed before impoundment, and 64 to 81 percent thought that waterfowl hunting had improved. About half stated that upland bird hunting was about the same, but 30 to 63 percent believed that big-game hunting had declined in quality. During the 3-year study period there was a gradual trend toward lowered satisfaction among local residents in regard to hunting and fishing quality within the study area.
DISCUSSION
Most of the observations made in this study cannot be compared to other areas since little has been published on reservoir recreationists
42 in general and the fishermen in particular. The significance of much of the material presented, therefore, must await further investigation. The study, however, has historical value for Flaming Gorge Reservoir, which can be expected to change in several respects in future years. It is hoped that the data assembled will provide an adequate basis upon which later developments may be evaluated.
Some trends already were in evidence during the first three years of recreation at Flaming Gorge Reservoir. The type of visitor changed from the early-explorer-type in 1963 to the modern-camper-type in 1965 who came for a specific objective, primarily fishing, desiring and expecting comfortable facilties near the water's edge. This change supports the contention of Clawson and Knetsch (1963) that one number and type of visitor would be attracted to a new reservoir area that had no facilities and another number and type would come when facilities were developed. Many campgrounds were not designed with parking space for the average 1.29 to 1.45 vehicles per party (exclusive of travel trailers and boat trailers) nor were parking areas level enough for these "mobile apartments", with their cooking stoves and refrigerators. Tent camping became less popular and most sites were too small for increasing numbers of visitors who preferred to park trailers side-by- side or truck campers back-to-back to maintain close social relationships.
Developed facilties were used by 80 to 90 percent of the parties, which is considerably more than the 40 percent reported on national forests by Clawson and Held (1957). This high-intensity use indicates a type of use approaching that experienced in national parks rather than in national forests and was probably because visitors came to Flaming Gorge to see something and take to an active part in water activities rather than to indulge in a camping or wilderness experience.
The high incidence of bank fishermen observed at Flaming Gorge was probably because most anglers came from Utah and Wyoming and the majority were experienced stream-trout fishermen who could also enjoy their sport from shore at the reservoir with no additional cash outlay for equipment. In addition, many visiting parties, which came to the reservoir for primary purposes other than fishing, brought along fishing tackle and made use of it when confronted with the opportunity afforded by shore angling.
CONCLUSIONS
The construction of Flaming Gorge Reservoir created a vast new recreation area which was primarily used by residents of metropolitan areas 200-250 miles away. More visitors used the study area than were expected and most parties engaged in mare than one type of activity.
43 Sight-seeing was the major attraction the first year, but fishing became the major attraction when angling began in the reservoir. Fishing was an important activity of members of most parties, regardless of primary purpose of party visit. Sight-seeing, in addition to being an important attraction, was the most popular activity during the three years.
During the first three years when the reservoir was filling, development of recreation facilities lagged behind demand with the result that picnic sites were scarce, camping areas were too small for the large parties using them and were not designed for the heavy equipment brought by visitors. Sanitation became a problem. Camping was an important activity of visiting parties, but was primarily a means to other ends, hence most campers were not interested in "quality" camping but rather in maximum use of space.
Boat ranps were wide enough for the large equipment and heavy use received and were well distributed. Many ramps, however, were not in the water much of the year. Where access was limited in the steep walled lower canyon portion of the reservoir boat camps were found to be effective in distributing camping, boating and fishing pressure on the reservoir. The importance of developed recreation sites to users indicated a need for well-developed and adequately-planned facilities that closely correspond to current trends in user interests and types of equipment used. Ideally, such facilities should be constructed before a reservoir is filled.
Visitors were most satisfied with the natural environment and least satisfied with the man-made aspects of the area. An increasing number of visitors requested improved information and interpretive programs and evidenced a lack of awareness and knowledge of the flora and fauna of the area. Early development of such services apparently would have improved visitor satisfaction.
The fishery management practices at Flaming Gorge Reservoir appeared to be successful in creating a quality sport fishery for rainbow trout during the second and third years. The condition of the larger fish, however, had begun to decline slightly by late 1965. Distribution of anglers was largely a function of location of access points, which were sparse on the lower canyon portion of the reservoir and more abundant, yet limited, on the upper desert portion. Recreational use patterns can be expected to change since fish productivity may change as the reservoir matures. The direction of trends cannot be predicted on the basis of the findings of this study.
The impact of the reservoir upon the local economy within a 50-mile radius of the study area has been substantial and promises to improve with increased visitor-use and development of more private concessions.
44 LITERATURE CITED
Clawson, Marion and Burnell Held. 1957. The Federal Lands: Their Use and Management. Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D. C., 501 p.
Clawson, Marion and Jack L. Knetsch. 1963. Outdoor Recreation Research: Some Concepts and Suggested Areas of Study. Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D. C., Reprint Number 43, pp. 250-275.
Dibble, Charles R., (ed). 1960. Ecological Studies of the Flora and Fauna of Flaming Gorge Reservoir Basin, Utah and Wyoming. Anthropological Papers, Number 48, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 243 pp.
Eiseman, F. M., F. W. Jackson, R. Kent, A. F. Regenthal, and R. Stone. 1964. Flaming Gorge Reservoir Post-Impoundment Investigations. Joint Report of the Utah State Department of Fish and Game and Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Progress Report Number 1, 8 p.
Eiserman, F. M., F. W. Jackson, R. Kent, J. Livesay, A. F. Regenthal, R. Stone, and J. White. 1965. Flaming Gorge Reservoir Post- Impoundment Investigations. Joint Report of the Utah State Department of Fish and Game and Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Progress Report Number 2, 39 p.
Jenkins, Robert M. 1961. Reservoir Fish Management--Progress and Challenge. Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, D. C., 22 p.
Lucas, Robert C. 1963. Bias in Estimating Recreationists' Length of Stay from Sample Interviews. Journal of Forestry, 61(12): 912-914.
Lund, Richard E. 1962. A Study of the Resources, People, and Economy of Southwestern Wyoming. Wyoming Natural Resources Board, University of Wyoming, Laramie, 112 p.
- National Park Service. 1958. Preliminary Planning Report- Recreation Use and Development--Flaming Gorge Unit, Utah-Wyoming, 22 p.
Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. 1962. Sport Fishing- Today and Tomorrow. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., Study Report 7, 130 p.
45 Remmers, H. H. and W. L. Gage. 1955. Measuring Attitudes and Interests. In Educational Measurement and Evaluation, Harper Brothers, New York, pp. 381-423.
Utah and Wyoming Fish and Game Departments. 1962. Pre-Impoundment Biological and Limnological Study of the Flaming Gorge Reservoir and Tailwater Fishery. 10 p.
Utah and Wyoming Fish and Game Departments. 1966. Flaming Gorge Reservoir Post-Impoundment Investigations, Progress Report No. 3.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many individuals and agencies contributed greatly to the com- pletion of this study. Dr. Robert E. Vincent and Dr. Robert H. Kramer were major advisors to the senior author during initial and final stages of the study. Dr. Theral Black and S. Ross Tocher contributed many timely and useful suggestions during the planning stages of the project and Dr. J. Alan Wagar offered valuable suggestions and criticisms in late stages of field work and in the preparation of this manuscript. The cooperation of the Utah Division of Fish and Game, Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Reclamation is gratefully acknowledged. Financial support for this study was furnished partly by the Utah Cooperative Fishery Unit, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, and by the Sport Fishery Research Foundation, which awarded the Otto S. Gumprich Fellowship to the senior author during all 3 years of the study.
46
Appendix A. Interview Schedule.
Utah State University WR-104b
Flaming Gorge Reservoir Visitor Use Survey Utah State University, Logan, Utah
To be filled in by interviewer: (Number) Location Date Time Weather
Phase I: One individual to answer for the party contacted.
1. Has any of your party been interviewed at Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area previously since January 1 of this year? Yes , No
2. Number of vehicles used by the party in getting here
3. Age, sex and number of your party members: Total number
Under 6 years: male , female 6 to 12: male , female 13 to 19: male , female 20 to 39: male , female 40 to 60: male , female over 60: male , female
4. Is more than one family represented in your party? Yes , No .
5. Are you on Vacation , Day off , Weekend , Off Duty . Retired , Don't work , Other (Specify)
6. Your usual place of residence (City or County, State or Country)
6a. If a rural resident in the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Area, how many miles from the reservoir do you live? miles.
7. Was a trip to the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area the prim- ary purpose of this trip: Yes , No
7a. If "no", where did your trip begin? and what is your destination?
47 8. Where did your party stay the night before arriving at the Recreation Area?
9. How many other times have you visited Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area since January 1 of this year? Times
10. Have you visited the area now occupied by the reservoir and Recreation Area in any previous years? Yes , No
11. What is the primary purpose of this visit to Flaming Gorge 'Reservoir Area: (Check only one).
Fishing Water Skiing Swimming Boating Picnicking Photography Camping sight Seeing Nature Study Other (specify)
12. Length of your stay here (intended or completed)? Hours , Days
13. If overnight, where did (will) you stay?
Didn't stay overnight Campground Nearby Motel Resort at reservoir Local guest ranch Nearby town Other (specify)
13a. If camping, check type of equipment used.
Pickup camper House trailer Tent Vehicle Shelter Outdoor Other Didn't camp
14. In what activities did your party actually take part while you were here?
Fishing Water skiing Swimming Boating Picnicking Photography Camping Sight seeing Nature Study Hunting Walking Sunbathing Other (specify)
15. How many in your party fished at Flaming Gorge Reservoir on this trip? (if "none", please skip to question 20). number.
48
16. What type of angling was done by those who did fish in the reservoir? (Check all appropriate categories).
a. Didn't fish b. Trolling , Casting Still fishing„ c. From boat , From shore or wading d. With bait , With artificial lure e. Fly rod , Spinning gear , Casting Tackle Pole Other (specify)
17. How many fish did your party catch this trip, and what kinds?
Didn't fish , None , Rainbow trout Kokanee , Other (specify)
18. Please mark on the attached map the areas(s) of the reservoir in which your party fished on this trip.
19. Please indicate all applicable reasons for fishing there.
Easy to get there Good looking spot Caught fish there before Someone suggested it Saw othars usirg it Didn't fish Other (specify)
20. If your party did NOT fish at Flaming Gorge Reservoir this trip, why not?
Don't fish Too much trouble to get lic. Didn't have time License fee to high Came for another purpose Heard fishing was poor Didn't bring tackle Season closed (thought) Don't know DID fish
21. Did anyone in your party fish anywhere else on this trip? Yes No
21a. If "yes", where
22. Approximately how much money did your party spend:
At the recreation Area $ Enroute or in towns within 50 miles of the reservoir $
Total spent within or near the Recreation Area $
49 Appendix A. (Continued)
Page 4 -- Visitor Use Survey
(Hand card lA to person being interviewed and explain that these are the choices from which he is to pick his answer to how he feels about each topic).
23. How did each of the following impress you here at Flaming Gorge Recreation Area? (Check only one opinion for each topic).
Very Slightly Very Satis- Satis- Unsatis- Unsatis Don't factory factory factory factory Know
Camping areas Picnic sites Boat launching sites Access roads Swimming areas Commercial concessions Comfort stations Fish--Cleaning Stations Shade trees Trails Parking areas Drinking water Officials contacted Fishing Weather Scenery Wildlife
Comments :
50
Appendix A. (Continued)
Utah State University WR-104b
Flaming Gorge Reservoir Visitor Use Survay
Utah State University, Logan, Utah
Supplement to interview schedule, for background information.
Phase II: To be answered by the individual, speaking only for himself instead of for the party.
24. Your occupation (Give title of job & brief description).
25. Age ; Sex: F M ; Married: Yes , No
26. Please circle the highest number of years of full-time schooling completed.
Grade & High School: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12. Trade or Special School: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - or more. College: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - or more.
27. Please check the category within which your annual family income usually falls.
Under $3,000 $7,000 to 9,999 $3,000 to 4,999 $10,000 to 15,000 $5,000 to 6,999 Over $15,000
28. In what type of town or population area do you live (check one)?
Rural (Farm or ranch) Suburban (outside city limits of large city) Small town (under 50,000) City (50,000 to 500,000) Large city (over 500,000)
29. Were (or are) either of your parents sport fishermen? Yes , No .
30. How much more money would you be willing to spend to come to the Flaming Gorge Recreation Area, than you did on this trip? (check one).
None 30% - 50% 1% - 10% 50% - 75% 10% - 20% 75% - 100% 20% - 30% More than 100%
51 Appendix A. (Continued)
31. If the Flaming Gorge Reservoir had not been built, where would you have gone on this trip?
Would have stayed home, or passed by: Would have come her anyway: Would have gone somewhere else (please specify):
Middle Firehole Canyon
Blacks Fork Crossing Firehole Canyon
Sage Creek Blacks Fork Basin
Current Creek Buckboard Crossing
0 3 6 Miles Holmes Ferry Development Site
Brinegar Ranch
Middle Marsh Creek
WYOMING • • Il UTAH Manila Lucerne Valley Dutch John Antelope Flat
52 Appendix B. Interviewer's Manual of instruction for use of Interview Schedule.
Flaming Gorge Reservoir Visitor Use Survey Utah State University, Logan, Utah
INTERVIEWER'S MANUAL (To accompany USU WR-104)
Location: The interviewer should fill in the name of the place where the contact is made in advance of the interview. The exact name of the campground, picnic area, overlook, launching site, bathing beach, etc. is wanted, or some other descrip- tion that will pinpoint the recreation site. This is to determine where people come from who use each unit at the reservoir, what their purpose there is, etc. Thus, the exact location must be known.
Date: The date is necessary and can be tallied in the usual manner (i.e. 5-13-63).
Time: The time of day is important and should be noted before the interview begins.
Weather: A brief description of the weather should be noted at the time of the interview (i.e. "hot-windy-partly-cloudy").
1. The question is self-explanatory. The purpose of the question is to obtain an estimate of the number of repeat visitors to the area and to determine the approximate number that are interviewed more than once during a season.
2. The total number of persons in the party should be noted in the "total" blank and the breakdown of ages and sex in the appropriate spaces. A "party" may include more than one family and a group traveling in more than one car. However, if they all came together they would be one party.
3. The term "family" means immediate family.
4. Your "usual" place of residence means the home town of the person in the party contacted -- the place where he lives for the major part of the year (over 6 months), or the place of his parents' residence, if a juvenile.
53 4a. If the party is from a farm or ranch area in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, or Daggett County, Utah, it would be more desirable to find out the distance from the reservoir rather than from the nearest town.
5. The "purpose" means of the over-all trip, whether or not they came specifically to visit the reservoir or stopped off enroute to some other point. By "this trip" is meant the journey from their home to a destination, or the return trip. If they were traveling from Boston to San Francisco, and stopped off at the reservoir enroute, the primary purpose was not a visit to the reservoir. If they were visiting friends in a nearby town and all came to the reservoir for the day, the purpose of their major trip was not to visit the reservoir. But, the purpose of their friends that day was to visit the reservoir.
5a. If they hadn't journeyed from home to the reservoir as their primary purpose, the origin and destination of the entire trip should be noted. The origin and destination would be the same on a roundtrip, or if some time was spent at a destination before the return trip was made, home would be the destination and the origin would be the former destination.
6. The term "you" refers to the party or any member in it.
7. This question also means any member of the party.
8. When all the members of the party came for one major purpose, checking one category should be no problem. However, when different members came for different purposes or the group intended to do several things, an attempt should be made to pin it down to one major purpose that was dominant over other incidental activities. Do not leave the question blank if one major purpose cannot be singled out. Mark the major purpose.
9. Length of stay for day-users will probably be most appropriate in hours. Parts of hours can be noted to the nearest quarter hour. Those who are sight-seeing as they drive by or stop to picnic may not stay very long, whereas campers, fishermen and others may stay several days. Days stayed can be marked to the nearest half day -- such as "stayed 2 1/2 days." Intended or completed days mean how long they intend to stay, if they have recently arrived at the time of the contact or have not yet completed their stay.
54 Appendix B. (Continued)
Page 3 -- Interviewer's Manual
10. For those who remained one or more nights for the purpose of recreation at the reservoir area, this question proposes to find out where they stayed. A party which arrived in a nearby town that night and visited the reservoir the same evening, stayed in town overnight and returned to the reservoir next day would have stayed overnight for the purpose of visiting the reservoir. However, a party arriving at such a town late, staying overnight, and visiting the reservoir next day before going on would not fit this category.
11. The approximate time, to the nearest quarter hour, spent by members of the party on each activity is desired. In regard to camping, the number of days would have to be used instead of hours. If length of time cannot be obtained, do not leave activities blank, check each engaged in.
12. The number in the party who actually fished in the reservoir during the present trip.
13. This question is to find out what methods and type of tackle anglers use on the reservoir. If they didn't fish in the reservoir, check part a. The new spin-casting tackle should be classed as spinning gear. Pole means the cane or willow pole type of anglers.
14. The total number of each species caught per trip from the reservoir. This survey is not interested in the catch from tributary streams or nearby lakes. Those staying overnight should list the fish caught during all days fished at the reservoir. Persons who live in or are visiting in nearby towns or a ranches or resorts and making fishing trips more than one day in a row should list only those caught on the day contacted.
15. Indicate to the person interviewed your approximate location on the attached map and ask him to point out the general area or bay in which he fished. Mark it boldly with an "X", or have him do it.
16. This question is designed to shed some light on why fishermen fish where they do. Try to pin the answer down to one reason, if possible. A person's first answer usually is indicative. However, if one reason cannot be determined, check all appropriate ones.
55 Appendix B. (Continued)
Page 4 -- Interviewer's Manual
17. The answers to this question may be many, but usually can be boiled down to those listed. If they answered the previous questions, you won't have to ask this one and should check the "DID" fish category and go on to the next question.
18. "This trip" means their over-all trip, as well as trips made by local people to the reservoir. Anywhere else means just that -- anywhere other than in the reservoir.
18a. If they did fish elsewhere, the "where?" can be very general -- such as lakes in California, Yellowstone Park, etc. However, besides learning whether or not they did fish elsewhere, this question is to determine if they fished in any lakes in the Uinta Mountains or any tributary streams to the reservoir. These should be mentioned by name, if possible. If they don't know the name of the lake or stream, just mark "tributary to reservoir" or "Uinta Mountain Lakes."
19. This page should be skipped when interviewing visitors at overlooks, boat-launching sites, etc. It is to be used for campers, picnickers and others who will take the time to answer. It is designed to determine opinions on facilities, surroundings, conditions, etc. in a manner that can be placed on a graph. Check only one opinion for each category. Any remarks made casually by those interviewed of importance should be noted under comments.
Supplemental Sheet: This sheet is to be handed to the person answering the questions so that he can answer these more personal questions in a more private manner. All questions an this sheet are to be answered by the individual, answering only for himself, instead of for the party.
20. The term "Occupation" means what provides over half his annual income.
21. Age and sex are self-explanatory; married means right now (if he is divorced or a widower, he is not married).
22. The "number of year" of schooling refer to full-time schooling. If the person attended night school or trade school while holding dawn a job, or went to college only one or two terms per year or took only a few hours of course-work while working, total the number of years and divide by two, then mark the appropriate number after dividing. Even though the person
56 Appendix B. (Continued)
Page 5 -- Interviewer's Manual
may have taken more than 12 years to complete his grade and high school education, mark the 12. If a person took a post-graduate course after graduation, list his in the trade or special school category. Schools completed while in the Armed Services also would count under trade or special schools.
23. Income refers to general gross income from all sources for the family.
24. Most of the categories are self-explanatory. However, "surburban" may be confusing. This was included to get at those highly metropolitanized surburban communities between large cities, on the outskirts of large cities, but outside the city limits of any city and more-or-less self-identified. A person who lives at Dutch John or Green River may consider himself a resident of that town, even though he lives just outside the city limits.
25. This question is to determine if there was a parental influence that was, or was not, followed; or if the person took up fishing in his generation.
FIGURE 16.--Fishermen preferred camping near the water. Photo: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
57 Appendix C.--Summary of responses to questions in interview schedule 1963-1965 -- expressed as percentages of parties answering each question each year, except where otherwise indicated.
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Parties contacted each year (Number). 404 615 442 Mean number of vehicles in each party. 1.29 1.43 1.45 Mean number of individuals in each party. 5.20 5.43 5.82 Party size (number of individuals).1/ Percent of Total 1 in party 2.5 2.1 1.8 2 1, /I 20.0 22.5 20.1 3 ii it 7.9 11.9 10.0 4 ti it 20.0 17.3 19.4 5 if it 14.4 11.9 10.2 6-10 " 29.2 25.6 28.1 11-20 " 5.7 7.2 9.3 21-50 " 0.2 1.6 0.9 51-100 " 0.0 0.0 0.2
Percentage of parties containing people in each age group. 1/
Under 6 years 29.6 26.2 15.4
6 - 12 years 44.6 38.5 32.8 13 - 19 years 34.8 30.9 25.8 20 - 39 years 57.1 54.6 44.6 40 - 60 years 62.9 59.7 52.0 Over 60 years 17.8 15.1 15.2
Your usual place of residence. Salt Lake City area 32.4 41.8 41.4 Ogden area 11.9 15.3 17.6 Vernal area 12.6 11.2 9.0 Green River-Rock Springs 9.2 11.4 8.7 Western Colorado 2.7 2.4 2.0 Denver area 2.0 2.4 2.5 Other Utah, Wyoming and Colorado areas 7.0 7.6 16.7 California 5.9 3.9 5.9 Unknown 0.6 0.0 0.0 All others 15.7 12.5 8.7
58 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Was a trip to the Flaming Gorge Reservoir 75.0 82.0 80.3 Recreation Area the primary purpose of this trip? Yes.
Where did your party stay the night before arriving at the Recreation Area?
Home 70.6 72.3 66.5 Vernal 8.5 9.8 12.4 Dinosaur National Monument 4.0 2.8 3.4 Nearby Uinta Mountains 2.4 1.8 2.5 Other 14.5 13.3 15.2
How many other times have you visited Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area since January 1 of this year?
One or more times 29.2 31.4 35.7
Have you visited the area now occupied by the reservoir and Recreation Area in any previous years? Yes. 54.0 52.4 59.7
What is the primary purpose of this visit to Flaming Gorge Reservoir Area?
Fishing 6.4 41.5 37.1 Boating 10.2 5.1 4.8 Camping 7.9 6.5 8.6 Water skiing 4.7 2.4 2.0 Picnicking 3.7 1.6 0.9 Sight-seing 55.9 37.1 36.2 Swimming 0.8 0.0 0.9 Photography 1.0 0.0 0.0 Nature study 2.2 0.0 0.0 Business 0.5 1.0 2.0 Hunting 5.0 3.9 6.8 Other 2.2 0.0 0.9
59 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Length of your stay here.
Unadjusted mean for all parties (days) 1.31 1.89 2.84 Adjusted mean to eliminate bias (days) 0.50 0.55 0.87
Parties which stayed overnight at or within 50 miles of the Study Area 57.7 61.9 75.8
If camping, check type of equipment used.
Truck camper 34.7 36.9 Tent 39.2 35.9 Outdoors with shelter 0.0 0.7 Boat 1.8 0.7 Tent trailer 2.1 1.6 Travel trailer 28.8 40.2 Vehicle 11.0 6.2 Outdoors without shelter 5.6 3.3
In what activities did members of your party actually take part while you were here?
Fishing 15.8 70.9 75.3 Boating 19.1 24.9 27.1 Camping 41.3 54.5 69.0 Hunting 5.7 4.7 9.3 Water skiing 9.7 11.7 9.3 Picnicking 16.8 28.8 44.3 Sight-seeing 74.0 75.6 91.0 Walking 0.0 11.5 29.4 Swimming 4.5 13.7 18.1 Photography 31.9 51.9 61.8 Nature Study 5.5 7.6 13.6 Sunbathing 1.0 10.9 19.2 Other 3.9 1.6 2.3
How many in your party fished at Flaming Gorge Reservoir on this trip?
One or more persons 0.0 67.8 74.4
60 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
If your party did NOT fish at Flaming Gorge Reservoir this trip, why not?
Don't fish 14.9 22.3 25.7 Didn't have time 4.2 12.2 21.2 Came for another purpose 41.8 44.7 35.4 Didn't bring tackle 2.0 9.6 9.7 Too windy 0.0 1.5 0.0 Too much trouble to get a license 1.2 4.6 2.7 License fee too high 0.3 0.6 0.0 Heard fishing was poor 0.0 1.0 0.9 Thought season closed 35.3 0.0 0.0 Unknown 0.0 1.0 0.9 Other 0.3 2.5 3.5
DID fish 0.0 67.8 74.4
Did anyone in your party fish anywhere else on this trip? If "yes", where?
Sheep Creek 13.4 4.4 0.0 Carter Creek 2.2 3.7 1.1 Green River 0.2 2.3 5.4 Green's Lake 0.7 0.5 0.5 Nearby Uinta Mountains 2.7 1.5 3.6 Yellowstone National Park 2.2 1.8 1.8 Other 9.9 2.9 7.4 No answer 68.6 82.9 80.1
Approximately how much money did your party spend?
Average amount of money spent per party per visit (mean) $21.80 $34.84
Adjusted to eliminate length of stay bias (mean) $ 6.34 $10.66
Percentage spent at Recreation Area 55.5 55.7
61 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Have you camped in this same campsite or campground previously? Yes. (86 responses) 24.7
How did each of the following impress you here at Flaming Gorge Recreation Area? (Mean scale scores from range 1-5)
Camping areas 4.74 4.46 4.59 Picnic sites 4.61 4.41 4.55 Boat launching sites 3.02 3.45 4.19 Access roads 4.32 4.62 4.58 Swimming areas 2.99 3.09 3.38 Commercial concessions 2.99 2.97 3.45 Comfort stations 4.39 3.78 4.18 Fish-cleaning stations 3.00 2.64 2.84 Shade trees 4.73 4.11 3.93 Trails 3.00 3.63 3.65 Parking areas 4.68 4.63 4.66 Drinking Water 4.05 3.18 3.61 Officials contacted 3.32 3.29 3.96 Fishing 3.13 3.80 4.14 Weather 4.62 4.63 4.64 Scenery 4.96 4.87 4.95 Wildlife 3.81 3.98 4.24
Please circle the highest number of years of full-time schooling completed.
Less than high school 18.5 23.8 17.2 High school graduate 27.6 24.3 26.9 More than high school 32.2 30.5 33.7 College graduates 21.5 21.3 21.3 Unknown 0.2 0.1 0.9
Please check the category within which your annual family income usually falls.
Under $3,000 4.2 3.4 4.5 $3,000 - $4,999 9.8 9.6 9.3 $5,000 - $6,999 26.9 28.2 27.6
62 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
$7,000 - $9,999 32.7 36.4 31.7 $10,000 - $15,000 19.9 16.8 19.0
Over $15,000 6.8 5.7 4.5 Unknown 0. 0 0.0 3.4
In what type of city or population area do you live?
Rural 12.2 4.5 8.8 Suburban 13.6 13.1 12.2 Small town 36.0 43.0 37.8 City 34.2 36.0 38.2 Large city 4.0 3.5 2.7 Unknown 0.0 0.0 0.3
Were (or are) either of your parents sport fishermen? Yes. 53.6 55.6 58.4
How much more money would you be willing to spend to come again to the Flamirg Gorge Recreation Area, than you did on this trip? (56 responses).
None 10.7 - 10% 21.4 10% - 20% 16.1 20% - 30% 12.5 30% - 50% 16.1 50% - 75% 1.8 75% - 100% 3.6 More than 100% 7.1 No answer 10.7
If the Flaming Gorge Reservoir had not been built, where would you have gone on this trip? (56 responses)
Would have stayed home, or passed by 16.1 Would have come here anyway 33.9
63 Appendix C. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Would have gone somewhere else 48.2 No answer 1 . 8
1/ Where sums do not equal exactly 10070, approximations are due to rounding to nearest tenth of a percent.
2/ Where sums exceed 100% by more than a few tenths it is because many parties answered in more than one catagory among choices of answers.
FIGURE 17.--About 2 percent of the visitors came primarily to water ski. Most water skiers also fished.
64 Appendix D. Questionnaire mailed to local residents.
USU Form WR-105 Number
Flaming Gorge Reservoir Visitor Use Survey Utah State University, Logan, Utah
Please answer questions 1 through 15 speaking for your entire household.
1. Did you or any members of your household visit the area now occupied by the new Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area in any years before 1963?
Yes No
2. How many times did you or members of your household visit the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area during 1965? times. (If none, please skip to question 14).
3. Please check each month during which you or members of your household visited Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area during 1965. January April July October February May August November March June September December
4. Please check each of the following activities in which you or members of your household took part while visiting the reservoir area during 1965.
Fishing Water Skiing Picnicking Boating Snow Skiing Swimming Camping Sight seeing Photography Hiking Rock hunting Nature study Bow Hunting Target shooting Sunbathing Waterfowl Upland game bird Big game hunting hunting hunting Watching water events Horseback riding Other (specify)
5. Which one of the above activities would you consider the major purpose of most of the visits made by you or members of your household during 1965? If more than one activity was engaged in, what were the second and third most important ones?
Major purpose Number two Number three
65
Appendix D. (Continued)
Questionnaire page 2
6. If members of your household fished in the Recreation Area during 1965, in which body of water did they fish?
Green River (above reservoir) Carter Creek Flaming Gorge Reservoir Green's Lake Sheep Creek (in canyon) Didn't fish
7. Did you or any members of your household go fishing anywhere else during 1965? Yes No
8. Please check each of the following recreation areas visited or used by you or members of your household during 1965.
Buchboard Rec. Area Antelope Flat Rec. Area Brinegar Crossing Skull Creek Camp Ground Lucerne Valley Rec. Area Greendale Camp Ground Carmel Camp Ground Cedar Springs Rec. Area Moenkopi Camp Ground Thtch John Draw Rec. Area Palisade Camp & Pic. Area Viewpoints at Dam Deep Creek Forest Camp Boat Camp Grounds Red Canyon Area Green Lake Area Other (specify)
9. Were those recreation sites visited easy to find? Yes No .
10. Were access roads to each generally good? Yes No •
11. Were the facilities at each suitable? Yes No
12. Did you or members of your household stay overnight at the Recreation Area during 1965? Yes No
13. If answer to 12 was "yes", where did you stay?
- Private cabin Motel or other commercial lodging._ Campground With Friends Other (specify)
14. Please check those types of recreation equipment owned by you or members of your household before January 1, 1963.
66
Appendix D. (Continued)
Questionnaire page 3
Boat(s) Camp Trailer or camper Outboard motor Water skis Boat trailer Camera(s) Fishing tackle Binoculars Shotgun(s) Swimming equipment Rifle(s) None of these Archery equipment Other (specify) Camping Gear
15. Please check items which were purchased by you or members of your household during 1963, 1964 or 1965.
Boat (s) Camp trailer or camper Outboard motor Water skis Boat trailer Camera(s) Fishing tackle Binoculars Shotgun(s) Swimming equipment Rifle(s) None of these Archery equipment Other (specify) Camping gear
Answer the rest of the questions speaking only for yourself, instead of for the members of your household. (Please answer, even if you did not visit Flaming Gorge Recreation Area in 1965).
16. Occupation (Give title or brief description)
17. Age , Sex: M F , Married: Yes No
18. Your residence (Give town and state only)
19. In which type of community do you live? In town In the country
20. Please circle the highest number of years of full-time schooling completed:
- Grade & High School: 1 - 2 - 3 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 Trade or Special School: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - more College: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - more.
67
Appendix D. (Continued)
Questionnaire page 4
21. Please check the category within which your annual family income usually falls:
Under $3,000 $7,000 to $9,999 $3,000 to $4,999 $10,000 to $14,999 $5,000 to $6,999 $15,000 and over
22. Have you gone fishing at any time within the past ten years? Yes No
23. Have any other members of your household fished since 1953? Yes No
24. Were (or are) either of your parents fishermen? Yes No .
25. Please check any or all organizations of which you have been a member in the past year.
Local sportsmen's club Gun club (any kind) Bird club Garden club Camping club Boating club Archery club National conservation None of these or recreation group Other (specify)
26. Which one of the activities listed under question four do you most enjoy doing? Activity
27. What one type of recreational use do you think the new Flaming Gorge Recreation Area is currently best suited?
Lengthy vacations , Overnight trips ,Day visits
28. In regard to the development of recreation areas and facilities at the Flaming Gorge Recreation Area, do you think the situation in 1965 was: Overdeveloped , Just right , or Underdeveloped
29. In your opinion, is the canyon area of the Reservoir more valuable to outdoor recreation now than it was before the Dam was built?
Yes , No , No opinion
68 Appendix D. (Continued)
Questionnaire pqge 5
30. Please indicate your opinion on whether or not hunting and fishing in the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area has improved, remained the same or gotten worse since the construction of the Reservoir.
Big game hunting: Improved , Same , Worse . Waterfowl hunting: Improved , Same , Worse . Upland bird hunting: Improved , Same , Worse . Fishing: Improved , Same , Worse .
Don't know about thpse not checked above
Comments:
FIGURE 18.--Preimpoundment treatment with rotenone to remove fish before stocking with rainbow trout.
69 Appendix E.--Summary of responses to questions in questionnaire mailed to local residents, 1963-1965 -- expressed as percentages of households answering each question each year
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Percentage of usable returns from 1,000 mailed questionnaires 39.8 47.8 38.9 Did you or any members of your household visit the area now occupied by the new Flaning Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area in any years before 1963? Yes. 82.3 79.5 75.1 How many times did you or members of your household visit the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area during the past year? One or more times 79.1 88.6 82.9
Please check each month during which you or members of your household visited Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area last year. 1/
January 6.5 17.8 16.5 February 7.0 19.9 19.3 March 9.5 18.4 19.0 April 11.3 23.6 26.0 May 22.9 36.2 41.4 June 40.5 56.1 57.3 July 46.7 65.3 62.7 August 41.0 57.9 58.1 September 27.9 48.5 45.8 October 18.6 34.3 36.0 November 10.8 18.4 19.5 Decembet 9.8 15.1 13.1
Please check each of the following activities in which you or members of your household took part while visiting the reservoir area last year.
Fishing 27.9 67.1 67.1 Boating 21.9 40.3 38.3
70 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965 Camping 14.6 22.4 19.0 Hiking 12.1 10.1 13.7 Bow hunting 1.5 1.0 1.3 Waterfowl hunting 1.8 2.3 2.3 Watching water events 14.1 16.1 10.8 Water skiing 9.8 17.4 14.9 Snow skiing 1.5 1.5 1.5 Sight-seeing 58.8 58.1 47.0 Rock hunting 13.1 14.0 15.7 Target shooting 2.0 4.0 4.1 Upland game bird hunting 1.8 2.9 2.6 Picnicking 53.5 60.6 48.1 Swimming 6.8 15.9 14.9 Photography 25.6 27.7 18.8 Nature study 8.0 5.9 4.1 Sunbathing 4.0 5.9 7.2 Big game hunting 10.6 14.9 12.9 Horseback riding 1.8 1.0 2.1 Other 1.5 2.7 3.6
Which one of the above activities would you consider the major purpose of most of the visits made by you or members of your household last year?
Fishing 22.1 59.3 67.0 Sight-seeing 39.1 16.5 11.2 Boating 7.8 5.4 7.7 Picnicking 21.1 8.6 5.1 Water skiing 3.4 2.5 2.2 Swimming 0.0 1.2 2.2 Hunting 1.7 0.7 1.0 Business 1.0 1.0 1.0 Nature study 1.0 0.5 0.6 Camping 1.4 2.2 0.3 Photography 1.0 1.2 0.0 Other 0.3 0.7 2.6
71 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Please check each of the following recreation areas visited or used by you or members of your household last year.
Buckboard Rec. Area 12.6 29.0 35.4 Squaw Hollow (Brinegar Cr.) 23.9 35.7 36.0 Lucerne Valley Rec. Area 20.2 32.1 34.6 Carmel Campground 6.5 5.6 6.0 Moenkopi Campground 5.8 4.0 4.4 Palisade Camp and Picnic Area 17.9 12.9 13.4 Deep Creek Forest Camp 8.1 9.6 3.0 Red Canyon Area 21.7 28.3 20.4 Green's Lake Area 22.7 25.4 13.9 Antelope Flat Rec. Area 8.1 22.3 28.6 Skull Creek Campground 3.8 6.5 6.0 Greendale Campground 9.8 9.4 4.9 Cedar Springs Rec. Area 11.6 16.7 20.7 Dutch John Draw Rec. Area 23.9 21.9 17.2 Viewpoints at dam 42.8 49.1 31.6 Boat Camps 0.3 19.4 18.0 Other 21.7 7.8 9.3
Were those recreation sites visited easy to find? Yes. 97.5 95.4 98.7
Were access roads to each generally good? Yes. 87.1 81.3 89.0
Were facilities at each sutiable? Yes. 79.7 78.9 81.9
Did you or members of your household stay overnight at the Recreation Area during the past year? Yes. 14.9 22.7 23.4 Please check those types of recreation equipment owned by you or members of your household before January 1, 1963.
Boat 16.4 17.2 16.9 Outboard motor 14.S 17.4 16.4
72 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Boat trailer 12.1 14.3 13.0 Fishing tackle 83.3 85.7 83.9 Shotgun 66.6 63.1 62.4 Rifle 79.2 79.4 78.3 Archery equipment 13.2 16.1 13.5 Camping gear 75.6 71.8 68.5 Camp trailer or camper 12.6 17.1 14.8 Water skis 7.1 8.7 7.4 Camera 82.7 77.9 73.8 Binoculars 57.5 60.0 54.8 Swimming equipment 41.4 38.9 42.9 Other 1.4 1.8 2.1 None of these 5.8 5.8 4.8
Please check items which were purchased by you or members of your household during 1963, 1964 or 1965.
Boat 6.3 11.4 11.4 Outboard motor 5.5 10.1 11.1 Boat trailer 4.8 8.5 10.1 Fishing tackle 53.3 61.3 55.0 Shotgun 6.3 7.2 6.9 Rifle 5.5 13.3 14.3 Archery equipment 4.8 4.2 3.4 Camping gear 22.8 19.9 20.4 Camp trailer or camper 6.3 8.2 11.6 Water skis 4.8 6.6 7.7 Camera 9.2 15.9 16.7 Binoculars 4.8 6.9 8.5 Swimming equipment 11.4 9.0 13.0 Other 0.4 1.6 1.1
Your residence.
Sweetwater County 66.2 62.2 61.4 Daggett County 4.4 3.9 7.6 Uintah County 23.8 29.8 27.8 Other 5.5 4.1 3.2
73 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
In which type of community do you live?
In town 88.0 87.4 86.3 In the country 12.0 12.6 13.7
Please circle the highest number of years of full-time schooling completed
Less than high school 28.6 26.3 22.0 High school graduate 27.8 25.3 27.8 More than high school 25.6 28.1 32.5 College graduate 18.1 18.1 16.1
Please check the category within which your annual family income usually falls.
Under $3,000 6.2 8.0 7.4 $3,000 to $4,999 17.4 14.9 10.3 $5,000 to $6,999 32.6 28.9 28.6 $7,000 to $9,999 29.2 30.2 30.4 $10,000 to $14,999 12.6 9.5 10.8 $15,000 and over 2.0 4.1 5.6
Have you gone fishing at any time within the past ten years? Yes. 89.3 93.2 90.0
Have any other members of your household fished since 1953? Yes. 82.0 86.8 84.3
Were (or are) either of your parents fishermen? Yes. 56.9 60.5 62.5
Which one type of recreational use do you think the new Flaming Gorge Rec- recation Area is currently best suited?
Lengthy vacations 10.4 11.2 13.5 Overnight trips 28.8 31.5 32.6 Day visits 52.7 47.8 45.2 Combinations 8.1 9.6 8.1
74 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
In regard to the development of recreation areas and facilities at the Flaming Gorge Recreation Area, do you think the situa- tion last year was:
Overdeveloped 1.9 2.0 4.3 Just right 30.0 30.5 33.4 Underdeveloped 67.1 67.3 62.0
In your opinion, is the canyon area of the Reservoir more valuable to outdoor rec- reation now than it was before the Dam was built?
Yes 86.7 86.7 88.5 No 3.6 2.9 2.7 No opinion 9.4 10.4 8.8
Please indicate your opionion on whether or not hunting or fishing in the Flaming Gorge Reservoir Recreation Area has improved, remained the same or gotten worse since the construction of the Reservoir.
Big game hunting
Improved 32.4 23.4 8.8 Same 37.2 38.1 28.5 Worse 30.4 38.1 62.7
Waterfowl hunting
Improved 80.5 67.6 64.1 Same 17.1 26.0 22.1 Worse 2.4 6.4 13.7
Upland bird hunting
Improved 42.0 30.7 30.6 Same 49.9 60.6 45.9 Worse 9.0 8.8 23.4
75 Appendix E. (Continued)
Year
Item 1963 1964 1965
Fishing
Improved 99.6 98.5 96.9 Same 0.4 1.0 2.1 Worse 0.0 0.5 0.9
1/ Where sums exceed 10070, it is because respondents frequently answered in more than one category among choices of answers.
- FIGURE 19. -Green River below Flaming Gorge Reservoir at the entrance to Lodore Canyon.
76
Appendix F. Creel Census Form.
CREEL CENSUS -- FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR Utah State University Logan, Utah
(Interviewer: mark on map approximate location of angler contact.)
Date , Time
1. Primary purpose of party visit, 2. Number in party, la. Age and sex: Under 13: male female (indicate 13 to 19: male female those not 20 to 39: male female fishing 40 to 60: male female ) Over 60: male female 3. Party residence City or County and State 4. How many times have you fished at Flaming Gorge Recre tio Area previously this calendar year? 5. Type of angling: a. Trolling Casting Still fishing b. From boat From shore c. With bait Artificial lure d. Fly rod Spinning gear casting Tackle pole other
6. Number of fish caught and kind: None Rainbow trout Kokanee Other (specify) 7. Where did you fish? (mark on map) 8. Why did you fish where you did? • I■1■I agi.gme ..■•■ Easy to get there Good Looking spot Caught fish there before Don't know Saw others fishing there Someone else suggested it Other (specify) 9. When did you start fishing? 10. Length of time fished: (draw line through hours fished)
4---5---6---7---8---9---10---11---12---1---2---3---4---5---6---7--8--9--10 (If angler is in a boat, ask where he put boat into water and mark on map.)
SPECIES CAUGHT LENGTH WEIGHT SPECIES CAUGHT LENGTH WEIGHT
77 Appendix G. Summary of responses to questions in creel census form, 1964-1965 -- expressed as percentages of parties answering each question each year, except where otherwise indicated.
Year
Item 1964 1965
Creel census contacts (total number) 806 824
Primary purpose of party visit.
Sight-seeing 19.2 14.1 Boating 4.2 4.6 Camping 3.4 5.6 Fishing 65.9 66.7 Huntirg 2.5 3.8 Water skiing 2.5 1.8 Picnicking 0.7 0.2 Swimming 0.0 0.2 Business 1.4 1.8 Other 0.0 1.1
Mean number in party. 4.23 4.40
Mean number in party not fishing. 1.11 1.05
Age of party members. 1/
Under 13 years 38.7 38.2 13-19 years 27.4 28.0 20-39 years 48.9 44.4 40-60 years 64.1 58.9 Over 60 years 14.4 14.7
Party residence.
Local Wyoming (within 50 miles) 13.2 6.9 Other Wyoming 1.9 3.3 Local Utah (within 50 miles) 15.6 7.4 Other Utah 61.1 65.5 Colorado 3.5 5.6 Other states 4.7 11.3
78 Appendix G. (Continued)
Year
Item 1964 1965
How many times have you fished at Flaming Gorge Recreation Area previously this calendar year?
None 44.8 50.5 1 to 5 42.5 39.9 Over 5 12.7 10.1
Type of angling.
Boat 36.7 36.7 Shore 63.3 63.3 Bait 37.8 54.9 Artificial lures 38.6 25.5 Both types 22.2 20.8
Parties with fish. 84.0 93.0
Average length of fish caught (Mean - inches) 11.16 11.24
Where did you fish?
Unit 1 (Wyoming desert) 17.8 11.8 Unit 2 (Utah desert) 26.9 29.1 Unit 3 (Open canyon) 22.3 13.3 Unit 4 (Lower canyon) 31.8 45.8
Why did you fish where you did?
Easy to get there 24.3 30.1 Caught fish there before 18.9 23.8 Saw others fishing there 3.4 2.4 Someone else suggested it 19.2 23.4 Good looking spot 29.5 16.4 Publicity 1.0 0.1 Gas rationing 0.5 0.1 Calm water 2.4 1.9 Don't know 0.1 0.0 Unknown 0.7 1.7 Has anyone in your party seen the other geographical portion of the reservoir? Yes. 57.6 63.9
1/ Where sums exceed 100%, it is because many parties answered in more than one category among the choices of answers.
79 Appendix H. Postal Card Survey Form.
Postal card form to determine number of travelers on U.S. Highways
30 & 40 who visited Flaming Gorge Reservoir.
Flaming Gorge Reservoir Visitor Use Survey
Location ------
Date Time
How many are in your party?_ Juveniles_ _ Adults _.
Are you headed: East_ West _North_ _ South
Residence (City & State) ------
Is this trip for: business_ _ _pleasure _ _other_.
Did you visit Flaming Gorge Reservoir and Recreation Area on this trip? Yes _
If "yes," how long did you visit? ------
Utah State University WR-101
80
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1 969 0-947-259