Rangeland Recreation REM 456 Integrated Rangeland Management Recreational

Rangeland Recreation REM 456 - Integrated Rangeland Management

Recreational on rangeland is increasing Changing recreation types § Upward trend in thrill-based activities like rock climbing and base jumping § Technology is allowing new types of recreation § off-road vehicles, GPS, etc. § Hunting - still a major sport but decreasing § Traditional activities like camping, hiking, and horseback riding continue strong and growing

Demographics favor recreation on public lands Urbanization has created a population with a desire to “get out of town” & enjoy nature Few people now living in towns/cities grew up on farms & have few rural connections. § Recreation is one way they can connect with the nature Growing willingness to spend money on recreation.

Economically Potent Pros Cons

Often perceived as “benign” People don’t see impact of their individual activity. Cumulative impacts are serious but there is little one person can do to reduce or increase this impact. Lack of data - many people don’t realize or notice the impact that recreation has on the land. Impacts of specific types of recreation vary – some are very hard on the land others are quite benign.

Extractive vs Amenity uses Varying impacts: § Extractive = removal of something from environment § Amenity = enjoyment, comfort Education plays a role in affecting impacts Recreation may be some people’s only contact with nature

Impacts of recreational uses - Positive § Economics to community § Economics for resource improvement & protection § $$ to lessen impact § Education “connection to land” § Trail development for wildlife and livestock § Weed & fire monitoring § Monitoring dumping/trash (self policing) § Hunting/fishing to maintain wildlife/fish

Impacts of recreational uses - Negative § Death of wildlife (abandon young) § Attracts animals to people (dangerous) § Fire § Weeds § Erosion & compaction § Water contamination § Disturbing the wildlife § Displacing wildlife (water and forage) § Trash and other dangers § Can alter habitat (human browse line)

For Example – Impact on Wildlife Effect of Hikers on Mule Deer Study by Knight & Miller –Boulder, Colorado 1996

For Example – Impact on Wildlife Effect of Hikers on Vesper Sparrow Miller, Knight, and Miller. 2001. Wildlife Responses to Pedestrians and Dogs. Wildlife Soc. Bull. 29(1): 124 -132.

For Example – Impact on Wildlife Alert Distance Effect of Hikers vs Mountain Bikers on Bison, Deer & Pronghorn at Antelope Island, Utah Flight Distance Moved Deer ON and OFF tail Taylor and Knight. 2003. Wildlife response to recreation and associated visitor perceptions. Ecol. Appl. 13: 951– 963.

How do wildlife respond & adjust? Learned response § Avoidance -§ Attraction -§ Habituation -- Genetic response

Conflicts Between Recreationists Motorized vs non-motorized Sound, litter, etc. Presence of other people Impacts

Management Approaches Rest § Close roads and trails § Adjust seasons § Limit areas of activity

Management Approaches Change intensity § No fire use § Bad roads § Limited facilities § Fees § Foot only. . . not motorized vehicles § Increase available facilities § Designate uses on specific areas

Survey of New Mexico Citizens Percentages of New Mexico Citizens Ranking: § Environmental Preservation § Commerce § Recreation as the Most Important Priority for Public Land Management

Recreation Spectrum of opportunity and conflict Required Not Welcome Will require: ◦ Compromise ◦ New Livestock Management Plans ◦ Listening to Understand

Recreation Wilderness visitor evaluation of encounters that affect the visitor experience. (n=577) Detracts (%) Can’t deny that livestock can affect recreationists. But, don’t make assumptions. Other Visitors Neutral (%) Adds (%) 54 32 14 7 42 51 Cowboys w/ cattle 62 24 13 Anglers/hunters 37 47 16 Backpackers 13 55 32 Outfitters 65 28 7 Wildlife <1 <1 99 Cattle 68 22 10 Sheep 66 23 11 Dogs 48 40 12 Horse/mules 51 34 15 Other packstock 45 44 11 Rangers Johnson, Wallace & Mitchell. 1997

Rangeland Recreation Conflicts www. lifeontherange. org Idaho Rangeland Resource Commission http: //www. youtube. com/watch? feature=player_embedded&v=D 9 IWO-N 1 h. F 0

ECONOMIC IMPACTS ECOLOGICAL IMPACT Pros Cons 2 Questions for today? 1) How to use economic benefit to reduce ecological detriment? 2) How to use ecological benefit to reduce economic detriment?

Rangeland Recreation REM 456 - Integrated Rangeland Management