Quantifying Recreational Use of an Estuary: A Case Study of Three Bays, Cape Cod, USA
Estimates of the types and number of recreational users visiting an estuary are critical data for quantifying the value of recreation and how that value might change with variations in water quality or other management decisions. However, estimates of recreational use are minimal and conventional intercept survey methods are often infeasible for widespread application to estuaries. Therefore, a practical observational sampling approach was developed to quantify the recreational use of an estuary without the use of surveys. Designed to be simple and fast to allow for replication, the methods involved the use of periodic instantaneous car counts multiplied by extrapolation factors derived from all-day counts. This simple sampling approach can be used to estimate visitation to diverse types of access points on an estuary in a single day as well as across multiple days. Evaluation of this method showed that when periodic counts were taken within a preferred time window (from 11 am–4:30 pm), the estimates were within 44% of actual daily visitation. These methods were applied to the Three Bays estuary system on Cape Cod, USA. The estimated combined use across all its public access sites is similar to the use at a mid-sized coastal beach, demonstrating the value of estuarine systems. Further, this study is the first to quantify the variety and magnitude of recreational uses at several different types of access points throughout the estuary using observational methods. This work can be transferred to the many small coastal access points used for recreation across New England and beyond.
KeywordsEstuarine recreational use Coastal access Cape Cod Water quality benefits Visitation
Special thanks to Zenas Crocker and the Barnstable Clean Water Coalition, Suzanne Ayvazian, Walter Berry, Marnita Chintala, Ryan Furey, Mo Howard, Tim Gleason, David Martin, Justin Michelson, Emily Santos, Mary Schoell, Marilyn ten Brink, and Talya ten Brink for their field assistance. We are also grateful to Suzanne Ayvazian, Rick McKinney, Casey Tremper, Marnita Chintala, and Wayne Munns for helpful comments on early versions of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This contribution is identified by tracking number ORD-027134 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Atlantic Coastal Environmental Sciences Division, 27 Tarzwell Drive, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA. The EPA does not endorse any commercial products, services, or enterprises.
- Banks-Leite, Cristina, Renata Pardini, Danilo Boscolo, Camila Righetto Cassano, Thomas Püttker, Camila Santos Barros, and Jos Barlow. 2014. Assessing the utility of statistical adjustments for imperfect detection in tropical conservation science. Journal of Applied Ecology. 51:849-859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cape Cod Commission. 2017. Implementation report: Watershed Report, Mid Cape Three Bays.Google Scholar
- English, Donald B.K., Susan M. Kocis, Stanley J. Zarnoch, and J. Ross Arnold. 2000. Forest Service national visitor use monitoring process: research method documentation. General Technical Report SRS-57. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 14pp.Google Scholar
- English, Eric, Roger H. von Haefen, Joseph Herriges, Christopher Leggett, Frank Lupi, Kenneth McConnell, Michael Welsh, Adam Domanski, and Norman Meade. 2018. Estimating the value of lost recreation days from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 91: 26-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Greene, Gretchen, Charles B. Moss, and Thomas H. Spreen. 1997. Demand for recreational fishing in Tampa Bay. Florida: a random utility approach. Marine Resource Economics. 12: 293–305.Google Scholar
- Horsch, Eric, Michael Welsh, and Jason Price. 2017. Best practices for collecting onsite data to assess recreational use impacts from an oil spill. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OR&R 54. Silver Spring, MD: Assessment and Restoration Division, NOAA. 121 pp. https://doi.org/10.7289/V5/TM-NOS-ORR-54. Available at ftp://ftp.library.noaa.gov/noaa_documents.lib/NOS/ORR/TM_NOS_ORR/TM_NOS-ORR_54.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2019.
- Leeworthy, Vernon R., and Peter C. Wiley. 2001. Current participation patterns in marine recreation. Silver Spring: U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Ocean Service. Special Projects.Google Scholar
- Leggett, Chris and Mark Curry. 2011. Assessment of visitor activities at six sites within Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Report prepared for National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Available at https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/management/upload/GGNRA-Visitor-Activities-Report-12-20-11-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2019.
- Lepesteur, Muriel, Aggie Wegner, Susan A. Moore, and Arthur McComb. 2008. Importance of public information and perception for managing recreational activities in the Peel-Harvey estuary. Western Australia. Journal of Environmental Management. 87: 389–395.Google Scholar
- Lipton, Douglas W., and Robert Hicks. 1999. Linking water quality improvements to recreational fishing values: the case of Chesapeake Bay striped bass, p. 105-110. In Pitcher, Tony J. (ed.) Evaluating the benefits of recreational fisheries centre reports. 7(2): 105-110.Google Scholar
- Lotze, Heike K. 2010. Historical reconstruction of human-induced changes in U.S. estuaries. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review. 48: 267–338.Google Scholar
- Lyon, Sarina F., Nathaniel H. Merrill, Kate K. Mulvaney, and Marisa J. Mazzotta. 2018. Valuing coastal beaches and closures using benefit transfer: an application to Barnstable, Massachusetts. Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics 5 (1) Article 1.Google Scholar
- NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration). 2019. Types of recreational fishing surveys. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/recreational-fishing-data/types-recreational-fishing-surveys#access-point-angler-intercept-survey. Accessed 20 Feb 2019.
- Pendleton, Linwood. 2008. The economic and market value of America’s coasts and estuaries: what’s at stake. Washington, DC: Coastal Ocean Values Press 182 pp.Google Scholar
- Spencer Banzhaf H.. 1996. Estimating recreational use levels with periodic counts. Triangle Economic Research Technical Working Paper: T-9602.Google Scholar
- State of Massachusetts. 2013. Massachusetts Year 2012 Integrated List of Waters: Final Listing of the Condition of Massachusetts’ Waters Pursuant to Sections 305(b), 314 and 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Available online: http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/water/resources/07v5/12list2.pdf. Accessed 8 Jan 2018.
- Tourangeau, Roger, Eric English, Kenneth E. McConnell, David Chapman, Ismael Flores Cervantes, Eric Horsch, Norman Meade, Adam Domanski, and Michael Walsh. 2017. The Gulf recreation study: assessing lost recreational trips from the 2010 Gulf Oil Spill. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology. 5 (3): 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wallmo, Kristy. 2003. Assessment of techniques for estimating beach attendance. Beach Sampling Report of NOAA. 33 pp.Google Scholar
- Zarnoch, Stanley J., Eric M. White, Donald B.K. English, Susan M. Kocis, and Ross Arnold. 2011. The national visitor use monitoring methodology and final results for round 1. General Technical Report SRS-144. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 83 pp.Google Scholar