PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 TABLE OF CONTENTS 7.2 RECREATION DEMAND ANALYSIS (REC 2)... REC 2-1 7.2.1 Study Objectives... REC 2-1 7.2.2 Study Area... REC 2-1 7.2.3 Methods... REC 2-1 7.2.4 Key Questions... REC 2-3 7.2.5 Results... REC 2-5 7.2.6 Schedule... REC 2-10 7.2.7 References... REC 2-10 TER 2 Appendix 1 Recreation Demand Analysis LIST OF TABLES NONE LIST OF FIGURES NONE April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-i \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 This page intentionally blank. Page REC 2-ii - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 7.2 RECREATION DEMAND ANALYSIS (REC 2) 7.2.1 Study Objectives The objective of this analysis is to compile and estimate existing and future visitor demand for recreation opportunities and resources within the study area (i.e., what facilities and activities are desired now and will likely be desired in the future). The purpose of the Recreation Demand Analysis is to synthesize the results of several separate recreation surveys focusing on different user groups, user counts, and other sources of demand information into an overall assessment. This assessment identifies existing and future visitor demand for recreation opportunities and resources, both regionally and in the project area. Findings from the Recreation Demand Analysis will be combined with the Recreation Supply Analysis (REC 1) and the Recreation Capacity and Suitability Analysis (REC 5) to form the basis for the Recreation Needs Analysis (REC 6), and subsequently the Recreation Resource Management Plan (REC 7). 7.2.2 Study Area The study area for the Recreation Demand Analysis ranges from the statewide region to the Lewis River valley. Data from the Washington Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) Region 2, including non-coastal Western Washington and portions of the Cascades, were used in analyzing regional demand. These regional data were supplemented with existing visitor survey data for Portland, Oregon area visitors to the reservoirs. For the Lewis River valley, demand data for the 3 local counties were analyzed as available. Results from individual visitor surveys conducted in the project area (REC 3 and REC 4) were also integrated into the Recreation Demand Analysis. 7.2.3 Methods 7.2.3.1 Study Design The Recreation Demand Analysis Consists of 2 components. The first component is a demand analysis using existing Washington Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and other available sources of regional data to estimate existing and future demand for various activities in the study area. The second component compares the results of the regional demand analysis with the recreation surveys (river-related recreation survey and the recreation survey) results (see REC 3 and REC 4). Results will be used to analyze latent demand, the potential effects of hydropower development and operations on recreation resources, and to develop protection and enhancement measures, if needed. In addition, since an estimated 23 percent of the visitors to the study area are from Oregon (principally the Portland metropolitan area), existing survey data for Oregon residents will be queried from the database to prepare a visitor profile of Oregon residents. This profile will be used to characterize visitor demand for this segment of April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-1 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 the visitor population and to determine if it is different from the remainder of the visitor population. 7.2.3.2 Study Area The study area for the regional demand analysis is Washington SCORP Region 2, an area that covers primarily non-coastal Western Washington and straddles the major portion of the Cascade Mountain range. This is consistent with the Yale Recreation FTR (PacifiCorp 1999). Within that area, more recent demand data specific to Clark, Cowlitz, and Skamania counties and the Lewis River corridor itself will be sought to augment SCORP data. Demand by Portland, Oregon area residents will be analyzed by querying existing survey data. The study area for the recreation survey component is addressed in a separate study plan. 7.2.3.3 Analytical Methods and Reporting Details of the 2 components of the Recreation Demand Analysis are described below. Recreation Demand Data Collection, Update, and Analysis Recreation activity demand data are primarily from the Washington IAC's SCORP document for Region 2, as identified in Washington Outdoors: Assessment and Policy Plan (1990-1995) (IAC 1990). The SCORP data will be used to help understand demand for various recreation opportunities and visitor preferences. The IAC is currently conducting a new recreation survey in 1999-2000 that will address recreation demand for Western and Eastern Washington State and will replace the old system of regions. This newer information will also be reviewed when received in mid- 2000. This study area is influenced by the proximity of the GPNF and the Monument. For the Yale Project, the USFS was contacted in 1996 regarding existing demand and future demand projections in the vicinity of the Monument and the GPNF. According to the USFS, activity-specific demand data are not available for either the GPNF or the Monument to use as the basis for projecting annual increases (pers. comm., S. Nelson, Recreation Planner, USFS, Vancouver, WA, November 22, 1996). The USFS recommended using existing SCORP Region 2 data to estimate demand in the previous Yale Lake study. This was accomplished in 1997-98 (PacifiCorp 1999). For this latest analysis, current data will be collected and reviewed (as available) for Clark, Cowlitz, and Skamania counties and the Lewis River corridor itself. Potential sources for updated demand data (as available) that should be investigated include: USFS, DNR, WDFW hunting and fishing permit/tag data, 1998 Oregon State Marine Board survey data, and Clark County. Existing survey data for Oregon residents will be queried by Postal zip code from the database to prepare a visitor profile of Oregon residents. This profile will be used to Page REC 2-2 - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 characterize visitor demand for this segment of the visitor population and to determine if it is different from the remainder of the visitor population. Using the SCORP data, a table (see the Yale Recreation FTR) will be developed listing annual percentage increases in recreation use by activity type. These percentages will be used later to estimate future recreation needs. Compare Regional Demand Data With Study Area Recreation Survey Results Study area recreation demand survey results will be compared with regional demand data. Similarities and differences will be noted. Latent demand will also be assessed including demand for activities that are in high demand regionally or statewide, but are not accommodated in the study area. The demand tables from the previous Yale Lake study will be updated (PacifiCorp 1999). The results of this analysis will be compiled into a technical report for use in consultation and other reports. The format will be similar to the recreation demand chapter in the Yale Recreation FTR (PacifiCorp 1999). 7.2.3.4 Response To Comments Previous RRG comments have been incorporated into this study plan in 1998. During the May 12, 1999 RRG meeting, 2 issues were discussed related to the Recreation Demand Analysis: (1) identifying recreation demand for Oregon residents (primarily the Portland metropolitan area) since an estimated 23 percent of the visitors to the study area are from this area and they are not captured in Washington SCORP studies; and (2) use of new 1999 IAC recreation survey data that will become available in 2000. To address these 2 concerns, this revised study plan includes the following: Assesses existing study area survey data for Oregon residents that will be queried from the database to prepare a visitor profile of Oregon residents. This profile will characterize visitor demand for this segment of the visitor population and will be compared with the rest of the survey population. This was approved by the RRG on July 27, 1999. IAC recreation survey data currently being collected in 1999 will become available in 2000. If available in mid-2000, the data will be used to help characterize regional recreation demand in Western Washington and will be compared with survey data collected in the project area. Any differences will be noted. This was approved by the RRG on July 27, 1999. 7.2.4 Key Questions The Recreation Demand Analysis, in conjunction with other recreation studies, is designed to address the following key watershed questions, as they relate to relicensing: April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-3 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 How do visitors to the project area potentially affect the use of other adjacent recreational areas during the peak use period? Visitors to the project area have only a minimal effect on use of other adjacent recreational areas during the peak use season. In general, visitors to the project area are seeking the specific type of recreation experience found at the project area, while visitors to adjacent recreational areas seek a different type of experience found at those locations. A more detailed discussion of the effect and distribution of visitors to the project area on adjacent recreational areas is presented in the Recreation Demand Analysis, included as REC 2 Appendix 1 of this 2001 Technical Report. How do boaters perceive the relationship between reservoir water levels and boating hazards from submerged objects (such as stumps)? The majority of boaters surveyed did not identify problems related to pool elevations; however, area residents reported more problems than did general project area visitors. Shoulder season visitors, many of whom are area residents, were more likely to indicate pool level problems, especially as they relate to submerged objects and boat ramp lengths. This is because the reservoir pool levels are much lower during the shoulder seasons and limit boater access. What are the recreation pool level and river flow needs? For recreation purposes only, reservoir pool levels should be similar to current project operations, which voluntarily maintain pool levels (assuming an adequate seasonal volume of water) within the top 5 feet (1.5 m) of full pool between the Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends. For the remainder of the year, a reservoir pool level for recreation purposes should be within an operational range that allows for year-round use of at least one boat launch lane on each reservoir. A new boat launch is proposed for Swift Reservoir to accommodate this need. Specific pool levels are discussed in the Recreation Needs Analysis (REC 6 Appendix 1 of this 2001 Technical Report). For recreation purposes, river flow below Merwin Dam should be adequate to maintain both ecological and recreational uses. It should be noted that nearly half of all river visitors surveyed indicated that river flow levels did not influence their decision to fish at the site at which they were contacted. The availability of fish to catch during natural fish runs was the reason that visitors flocked to this area. What is the demand for shoreline recreation developments, such as campgrounds, picnic areas, and put-in and take-out points? Demand is currently high, especially during peak-month (July and August) weekends for campgrounds, day use areas, and boating facilities. Camping, day use activities (picnicking, day hiking, etc.), and boating activities may require additional recreation facilities in the future to accommodate this increased demand. Day use fees implemented in 1999 have had an effect on day use area occupancy, though current trends with rebounding visitation suggest that despite the fees, demand for day use activities will continue to increase in the study area in the future. Page REC 2-4 - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 What is the demand for recreational opportunities that might be provided in the Swift bypass reach? There is demand for recreational fishing and wildlife observation opportunities in the bypass reach. It could be partially accommodated in the Swift bypass reach, consistent with resource values and the need to keep dispersed day use recreation away from areas that experience periodic high flow releases. Overnight recreation use is not appropriate in the Swift bypass reach. What is the demand for wildlife-oriented interpretive facilities or other Interpretation and Education (I&E)-oriented programs? Demand for wildlife interpretive facilities is high and expected to increase 2.67 percent per year, while demand for other interpretation and education-oriented programs is expected to increase 3.12 percent per year. These are very high annual increases compared to many other activities. Do visitors perceive any conflicts between hunting and other recreational activities? Conflict between hunting and other recreational activities was not identified as a significant concern by visitors or area residents surveyed in the study area. In the last few months, however, this issue surfaced at a Recreation Resource Group (RRG) meeting based on written input from the Wild Turkey Association. What is the demand for various types of potential recreational enhancements in the basin? The high demand for many recreational activities in the study area (relaxation, hiking, camping, fishing, etc.), in combination with existing use, warrants some additional recreational enhancements (facilities/programs). Demand is especially high at campgrounds and some day use areas. What is the demand for hiking and other types of trails? Day hiking on trails is in very high demand. Various trails are discussed in the Trail Feasibility Study (REC 5 Appendix 2 of this 2001 Technical Report). This study is ongoing and will extend into 2002. 7.2.5 Results Results of the Recreation Demand Analysis are summarized below, discussed in terms of demand at the statewide, regional, and project area levels. These results are documented in detail in the Recreation Demand Analysis included as REC 2 Appendix 1 of this 2001 Technical Report. April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-5 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 7.2.5.1 Statewide and Regional Demand Recreational Setting On a statewide basis, most recreational users prefer a more primitive setting than they typically use. This is particularly true in urban areas where more primitive settings are often difficult to access due to personal time constraints or other restrictions. Activity-Related Demand Several of the activities included in the SCORP analysis (Region 2) are projected to expand at more than 150 percent (high demand) between 2000 and 2035, using extrapolations of data provided for the period ending in 2000. These include: Visiting interpretive displays Bicycle riding (on-road) Picnicking Outdoor photography Day hiking The majority of the activities included in the SCORP analysis (Region 2) are projected to expand at levels between 100 and 150 percent (moderately high demand) between 2000 and 2035, using extrapolations of data provided for the period ending in 2000. These include: Bicycle riding (off-road) Lake non-motorized boating 4-wheel drive (4WD) vehicle driving All-terrain vehicle (ATV) riding Sightseeing and exploring Swimming (beach) Climbing and mountaineering Backpacking (trail) RV camping Water skiing Tent camping Windsurfing Backpacking (off trail) Lake power boating Sailing For comparison purposes, demand for most recreation activities in the Pacific Region (5 western states) will be greater than for the same activities on a national basis. Future participation will be considerably higher in the Pacific Region for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing. Hunting is the only activity for which demand will decrease both nationally and in the Pacific Region. In contrast, hunting demand is expected to increase in the study area. This finding is supported by continued increasing demand for hunting licenses in counties within and near the study area. Page REC 2-6 - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 Population Trends Regional population trends indicate that the population will continue to grow at a rapid and steady pace for the next 20 years. Cowlitz County population will increase by 43 percent by the year 2020 Skamania County population will increase by 29 percent by the year 2020 Washington State population will increase by 32 percent by the year 2020 Trends in regional population growth will be centered in the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. These 2 areas combined account for two thirds (66 percent) of the peak season visitors to the study area. Washington County (Oregon) population will increase by 43 percent by the year 2020 Clackamas County (Oregon) population will increase by 42 percent by the year 2020 Clark County (Washington) population will increase by 26 percent by the year 2020 7.2.5.2 Demand at the Project Reservoirs Overall and Setting-Related Demand As indicated above, visitors on a statewide basis prefer settings that are more primitive than the settings they use most frequently. This is particularly true of 2 activities that are popular in the study area: camping and water activities. Individuals prefer semiprimitive and primitive settings but frequently choose roaded settings due to various constraints. Several of the most common activities indicated by all visitors to the study area also have high levels of existing demand. In addition, not only are the following activities currently popular in the area, but they will become increasingly popular at a faster rate than many other activities: Hiking high demand (2.7 percent increase yearly) Swimming/sunbathing moderately high demand (2.2 percent increase yearly) RV camping moderately high demand (2.5 percent increase yearly) Fishing (boat and bank) moderate demand (1.9 and 1.7 percent increase per year, respectively) Personal watercraft (PWC) use is an important component of future demand for boating facilities. Participation in this activity is growing rapidly. Total visitation to the project area has decreased in recent years, primarily in 1998 and 1999. There are 2 potential reasons for this decline (user fees and poor weather), both of which are discussed below in further detail. April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-7 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 The most frequently mentioned additional facilities or facility improvements desired by respondents to the visitor surveys were related to: Restrooms/showers Boat docks/launches (particularly at Swift Reservoir) Swimming areas Hookups at campgrounds Shoreline dispersed use areas There are relatively few activities that are in demand by visitors but not available in the project area (i.e., latent demand). Exceptions include dispersed vehicle camping and being able to ride ATVs in the project area. Camping-Related Demand Utilization of campgrounds in the project area is high during weekends in July and August and on holiday weekends, and occasionally exceeds capacity. Utilization is significantly lower on weekdays and during the non-summer months. Utilization of campgrounds in the project area has steadily declined since 1996. There are 2 potential reasons for this decline (user fees and weather), both of which are discussed below in further detail. Day Use-Related Demand Utilization of day use areas is high during weekends in July and August and on holiday weekends; however, use does not usually exceed capacity. Occasionally, day use sites, such as Yale Park, are full to overflowing, particularly on hot sunny days. Overall day use area utilization is much lower than for campgrounds in the project area. Utilization is significantly lower on weekdays and during the non-summer months. Boating-Related Demand Most boaters in the project area during the summer months did not experience many problems related to reservoir pool levels. However, area residents (who often recreate during the off-season) and fall season visitors experienced significantly more problems related to low reservoir pool levels. Utilization of existing undeveloped shoreline sites is moderate and primarily focused on weekends during July and August. Dispersed shoreline camping is more popular on Yale Lake and Swift Reservoir compared to Lake Merwin. Page REC 2-8 - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 Off-Season Demand Demand for recreation in the project area during the off-season (September to May) is comparatively low and is primarily focused on hunting and fishing. Many of these visitors prefer to camp at dispersed recreation sites rather than at developed facilities. In response to the lower off-season demand, only 4 project day use areas and 1 project campground remain open during portions of the off-season. 7.2.5.3 Other Factors Impacting Demand Effect of User Fees on Demand In the last 2 years, recreation day use fees were instituted in the area by PacifiCorp to discourage cruising from site to site among day users. These new fees were coupled with new rules prohibiting the use of alcoholic beverages in the campgrounds to create a more family-oriented camping and day-use experience. While some day use visitors continue to be unhappy with the new fees, the success of the user-fee program in achieving these goals is reflected by the decrease in cruising from site to site. However, due to the fact that data used in the calculation of total visitation at day use areas is obtained by traffic counters, the decrease in cruising has resulted in a dramatic drop in total use figures. These new use figures more adequately represent the true visitation to the area (without cruising ) and will likely increase gradually over time. A new visitor pass system for residents is also expected to result in an increase in day use site visits by residents in the next few years. Overall, new day use fees should not result in a dramatic decrease in demand, but in a shift in how the day use areas are used. User fees have initially decreased use; however, the creation of a more family-oriented experience should attract new visitors to replace those who may have stopped visiting the area due to new policies and fees. Non-resident fall season visitors may visit the area less in the future if the user fees remain in place. In addition, a large proportion of area residents indicated that user fees could affect their future use of the project area. However, both of these user groups represented a small proportion of the total year-round visitation to the area, before user fees were established. Effect of Weather on Demand Due to the popularity of water-based activities in the project area, weather conditions in the project area have a significant impact on year-to-year visitation at project recreation facilities. Declining utilization of campgrounds and day-use areas in recent years can be partly traced to cooler and wetter than normal weather conditions in the Lewis River valley. April 2004 Final Technical Reports - Page REC 2-9 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
PacifiCorp / Cowlitz PUD FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 7.2.6 Schedule The Recreation Demand Analysis is complete. 7.2.7 References IAC (Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation). 1990. Washington Outdoors: Assessment and Policy Plan, 1990-1995 (an Element of Washington s SCORP). Tumwater, WA, April 1990. PacifiCorp. 1999. License Application for the Yale Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2071. Includes Final Technical Reports as Technical Appendices. Portland, Oregon. Page REC 2-10 - Final Technical Reports April 2004 \\Neoserver\disk1\Projects\Lewis River\Final Tech Reports 04-04\07.0 REC\REC 02 Final 032604.doc
REC 2 Appendix 1 Recreation Demand Analysis
RECREATION DEMAND ANALYSIS FERC Nos. 2111, 2213, 2071, and 935 Prepared by: EDAW, Inc. Seattle, Washington Prepared for: PacifiCorp Portland, Oregon and Cowlitz PUD Longview, Washington September 29, 2002
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PacifiCorp/Cowlitz PUD The purpose of the Recreation Demand Analysis is to synthesize the results of several separate recreation surveys focusing on different user groups, user counts, and other sources of demand information into an overall assessment. This assessment identifies existing and future visitor demand for recreation opportunities and resources, both regionally and in the project area. Findings from the Recreation Demand Analysis will be combined with the Recreation Supply Analysis (REC 1) and the Recreation Capacity and Suitability Analysis (REC 5) to form the basis for the Recreation Needs Analysis (REC 6), and subsequently the Recreation Resource Management Plan (REC 7). The Recreation Demand Analysis consists of 2 components. The first component is a statewide and regional demand analysis using the Washington State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and other available sources of regional data to assess existing and future demand for various activities in the region. The second component consists of results from visitor and resident surveys administered to various user groups in the project area and vicinity. The major results from the synthesis of data presented in this report are summarized below. Statewide Demand On a statewide basis, most recreational users prefer a more primitive setting than they typically use. This is particularly true in urban areas where more primitive settings are often difficult to access due to time constraints or other restrictions. Regional Demand Activity-Related Demand Several of the activities included in the SCORP analysis (Region 2) are projected to expand at more than 150 percent (high demand) between 2000 and 2035, using extrapolations of data provided for the period ending in 2000. These include: - Visiting interpretive displays - Bicycle riding (on-road) - Picnicking - Outdoor photography - Day hiking The majority of the activities included in the SCORP analysis (Region 2) are projected to expand at levels between 100 percent and 150 percent (moderately high demand) between 2000 and 2035, using extrapolations of data provided for the period ending in 2000. These include: - Bicycle riding (off-road) - 4WD vehicle driving - Sightseeing and exploring - Climbing and mountaineering Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 ES-1
- RV Camping - Tent camping - Backpacking (off trail) - Sailing - Lake non-motorized boating - ATV riding - Swimming (beach) - Backpacking (trail) - Water skiing - Windsurfing - Lake power boating For comparison purposes, demand for most recreation activities in the Pacific Region (5 western states) will be greater than for the same activities on a national basis. Future participation will be considerably higher in the Pacific Region for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing. Hunting is the only activity for which demand will decrease both nationally and in the Pacific Region. However, hunting demand is expected to increase in the study area, indicating that while demand is decreasing on a regional level, participation in various forms of hunting in the study area will continue to rise. This finding is supported by continued increasing demand for hunting licenses in counties near the study area. Population Trends Regional population trends indicate that population will continue to grow at a rapid and steady pace for the next 20 years. - Cowlitz County population will increase by 43 percent by the year 2020 - Skamania County population will increase by 29 percent by the year 2020 - Washington State population will increase by 32 percent by the year 2020 Trends in regional population growth will be centered in the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. These two areas combined account for two thirds (66 percent) of the peak season visitors to the study area. - Washington County (Oregon) population will increase by 43 percent by the year 2020 - Clackamas County (Oregon) population will increase by 42 percent by the year 2020 - Clark County (Washington) population will increase by 26 percent by the year 2020 ES-2 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
Demand at the Project Reservoirs Overall and Setting-Related Demand As indicated above, visitors on a statewide basis prefer settings that are more primitive than the settings they use most frequently. This is particularly true of 2 activities that are popular in the study area: camping and water activities. Individuals prefer semi-primitive and primitive settings but frequently choose roaded settings due to various constraints. Several of the most common activities indicated by all visitors to the study area also have high levels of existing demand. In addition, not only are the following activities currently popular in the area, but they will become increasingly more popular at a faster rate than many other activities: - Hiking high demand (2.7 percent increase yearly) - Swimming/sunbathing moderately high demand (2.2 percent increase yearly) - RV camping moderately high demand (2.5 percent increase yearly) - Fishing (boat and bank) moderate demand (1.9 and 1.7 percent increase yearly) Personal watercraft use is an important component of future demand for boating facilities. Participation in this activity is growing rapidly. Total visitation to the project area has decreased in recent years, primarily in 1998 and 1999. There are 2 potential reasons for this decline (user fees and weather), both of which are discussed below in further detail. The most frequently mentioned additional facilities or facility improvements among respondents to the visitor surveys were related to: - Restrooms/showers - Boat docks/launches (particularly at Swift Reservoir) - Swimming areas - Hookups at campgrounds - Shoreline dispersed use areas There are relatively few activities that are in demand by visitors but not available in the project area (latent demand). Exceptions include dispersed vehicle camping and being able to ride ATVs in the project area. Camping-Related Demand Utilization of campgrounds in the project area is high during weekends in July and August and on holiday weekends, and occasionally exceeds capacity. Utilization is significantly lower on weekdays and during the non-summer months. Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 ES-3
Utilization of campgrounds in the project area has steadily declined since 1996. There are 2 potential reasons for this decline (user fees and weather), both of which are discussed below in further detail. Day Use-Related Demand Utilization of day-use areas is high during weekends in July and August and on holiday weekends, however, use does not usually exceed capacity. Overall day-use area utilization is much lower than for campgrounds in the project area. Utilization is significantly lower on weekdays and during the non-summer months. Boating-Related Demand Most boaters in the project area during the summer months did not experience many problems related to reservoir pool levels. However, area residents (who often recreate during the off-season) and fall season visitors experienced significantly more problems related to reservoir pool levels when pool levels were much lower. Utilization of undeveloped shoreline sites is moderate and primarily focused on weekends during July and August. Dispersed shoreline camping is more popular on Swift Reservoir than on Lake Merwin. Off-Season Demand Demand for recreation in the project area during the off-season (September to May) is comparatively low and is primarily focused on hunting and fishing. Many of these visitors prefer to camp at dispersed recreation sites rather than at developed facilities. In response to the lower off-season demand, only 4 project day-use areas and one project campground remain open during portions of the off-season. Other Factors Impacting Demand Effect of User Fees on Demand Recreation user fees were instituted in the area to discourage cruising from site to site among day users, and were coupled with prohibiting alcoholic beverages in the campgrounds to create a more family-oriented camping and day use experience. The success of the user-fee program in achieving these goals is reflected by the decrease in cruising from site to site. However, due to the fact that data used in the calculation of total visitation at day use areas is obtained by traffic counters, the decrease in cruising has resulted in a dramatic drop in total use figures. These new use figures ES-4 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
more adequately represent the true visitation to the area (without cruising ) and will likely increase gradually over time. Overall, new day use fees should not result in a dramatic decrease in demand, but in a shift in how the day use areas are used. User fees have initially decreased demand, however, the creation of a more family-oriented experience should attract new visitors to replace those who may have stopped visiting the area due to new policies and fees. Non-resident fall season visitors may visit the area less in the future if current user fees remain in place. In addition, a large proportion of area residents indicated that user fees could affect their future use of the project area. However, both of these user groups represented a small proportion of the total year-round visitation to the area, before user fees were established. Effect of Weather on Demand Due to the popularity of water-based activities in the project area, weather conditions in the project area have a significant impact on year-to-year visitation at project recreation facilities. Declining utilization of campgrounds and day-use areas in recent years can be partly traced to cooler and wetter than normal weather conditions in the Lewis River Valley. Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 ES-5
CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1-1 2.0 STUDY AREA... 2-1 3.0 METHODS... 3-1 3.1 Methodology for Assessing Regional and Future Demand... 3-1 3.2 Methodology for Conducting Recreation Studies... 3-2 3.2.1 User Count Observations Methodology... 3-2 3.2.2 Visitor and Area Resident Survey Methodology... 3-4 4.0 ANALYSIS... 4-1 4.1 Demand for Project-Related Activities... 4-1 4.1.1 Existing Regional Demand for Project-Related Activities... 4-1 4.1.2 Existing Statewide Demand for Project-Related Activity Settings... 4-3 4.1.3 Existing Study Area Demand for Project-Related Activities... 4-4 4.1.4 Estimates of Future Demand and Trends for Project-Related Activities... 4-6 4.2 Demand for Recreation Facilities in the Project Area... 4-11 4.2.1 Overall Visitation in the Project Area... 4-12 4.2.2 Campground Occupancy... 4-12 4.2.3 Day Use Area Occupancy... 4-16 4.2.4 Dispersed Shoreline Site Occupancy... 4-17 4.2.5 Off-Season Recreation Use... 4-17 4.2.6 Survey Results Regarding Facilities... 4-18 4.2.7 Reservoir Pool Level Effects on Recreation... 4-19 4.2.8 User Fee Effects on Recreation Demand... 4-20 4.2.9 Visitor Perceptions of Crowding... 4-21 4.2.10 Local and Regional Population Trends... 4-22 4.3 Latent Demand... 4-23 4.4 Summary of Demand Analysis... 4-23 4.5 Demand-Related Topics Raised by Resource Agencies... 4-29 5.0 REFERENCES... 5-1 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 i
TABLES Page Table 4.1-1 Existing recreation demand in PNRRC Region 2 by activity by household trips... 4-2 Table 4.1-2 Most common activities in the study area by user group... 4-5 Table 4.1-3 Primary activities in the study area by user group... 4-5 Table 4.1-4 Projected increase in demand for recreation activities in the study area to 2035... 4-6 Table 4.1-5 National and regional trends in outdoor recreation activity Participation (2000 to 2030)... 4-10 Table 4.2-1 Project recreation facility total annual visitation for 1994 to 2000... 4-11 Table 4.2-2 Project campground occupancy for 1996 to 2000 by timeframe... 4-13 Table 4.2-3 Holiday weekend occupancy (July 4) at PacifiCorp s 5 campgrounds at the Lewis River Projects from 1996 to 2000... 4-14 Table 4.2-4 Annual campground occupancy for PacifiCorp s 5 campgrounds at the Lewis River Projects from 1996 to 2000... 4-14 Table 4.2-5 Day use area parking occupancy... 4-16 Table 4.2-6 Preferred facility improvements by user groups... 4-18 Table 4.2-7 Demand-related boat launch information... 4-19 Table 4.2-8 Population estimates and forecasts for selected areas of Washington State... 4-22 Table 4.2-9 Population estimates and forecasts for selected areas of Oregon... 4-23 ii Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
FIGURES Page Figure 2.0-1 Washington PNRCC Region 2 and SCORP Planning District 6... 2-2 Figure 2.0-2 Regional Recreation Opportunities... 2-3 APPENDICES Appendix A Lake Merwin and Swift Reservoir Survey Results Appendix B Yale Lake Survey Results Appendix C Oregon Resident Component of Recreation Visitor Survey Results Appendix D Dispersed/Displaced Recreation Visitor Survey Results Appendix E Fall Season Recreation Visitor Survey Results Appendix F Area Resident Survey Results Appendix G River-Related Recreation Survey Results Appendix H Private Non-Project Recreation Survey Results Appendix I Angler Creel Survey Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 iii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 4WD ATV DNR GPNF I&E IAC IP Monument PNRRC PWC ROS RV SCORP USFS WDFW 4-wheel-drive all terrain vehicle Washington Department of Natural Resources Gifford Pinchot National Forest Interpretation and Education Washington Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation Planning International Paper Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument Pacific Northwest Regional Recreation Committee personal watercraft Recreation Opportunity Spectrum recreational vehicle Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan U.S. Forest Service Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife iv Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
1.0 INTRODUCTION RECREATION DEMAND ANALYSIS PacifiCorp/Cowlitz PUD The Recreation Demand Analysis is one of 7 recreation studies that collectively will provide the information necessary to develop an understanding of recreation resources as part of relicensing the. Results from the Recreation Demand Analysis will be used in conjunction with other studies to develop the Recreation Needs Analysis (REC 6) and the Recreation Capacity and Suitability Analysis (REC 5). All of these studies will then be combined with agency coordination and consultation in the development of the Recreation Resource Management Plan (REC 7). The purpose of the Recreation Demand Analysis is to synthesize the results of several recreation surveys and user counts into an overall assessment. This assessment identifies existing and future visitor demand for recreation opportunities and resources, both regionally and in the project area. The Recreation Demand Analysis consists of 2 components. The first component is a regional demand analysis using the Washington State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and other available sources of regional data to assess existing and future demand for various activities in the region. The second component consists of results from visitor and resident surveys administered to various user groups in the project area and vicinity. The project area includes Lake Merwin, Yale Lake, Swift Reservoir, Swift No. 2 power canal, and associated recreation developments. These surveys identified the characteristics, attitudes, and preferences of the different visitors in each distinct group. Visitors, residents, and business owners in the vicinity of the projects were also surveyed. In addition, user counts were conducted that determined campground and day-use area usage, numbers of parked vehicles, dispersed use, and boat counts. Information on several key indicators of demand were identified from a synthesis of the regional demand data and the results from the surveys and user counts. Several of these key indicators were: Popular recreation activities among visitors; Existing and future regional and national demand for study area activities; Existing demand for recreation activity settings; Demand for study area recreation facilities (facility utilization and visitor survey data); Local and regional population trends; and Latent demand Although this Demand Analysis focuses on all of the 4 Lewis River Projects, some results are separated into 2 sections: (1) Yale Lake, and (2) Lake Merwin, Swift Reservoir, and the Swift No. 2 power canal. This was necessary since most of these data Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 1
specific to Yale Lake were obtained in 1996 and 1997, while the data for the other 3 projects were obtained in 1998 and 1999. In addition, Yale Lake provides a somewhat different, more developed recreation experience than the other 3 areas. As a result, visitor surveys and user counts for each of these 2 areas are reported separately, but are easily compared. Combined data for all 4 projects on campground occupancy and total study area visitation are presented in Section 4.2. Results from each of the surveys, studies, and user counts are attached as appendices. User count data and visitor survey results for Swift Reservoir and Lake Merwin can be found in Appendix A, while similar information for Yale Lake can be found in Appendix B. 2 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
2.0 STUDY AREA The study area for the first component of the demand analysis, the regional and future demand analysis, focuses on the larger regional/watershed area. This area is primarily represented by Washington SCORP Region 2 (see Figure 2.0-1), a 12-county area that covers non-coastal Western Washington and straddles the major portion of the Cascade Mountain range. Although not included in Washington State Region 2, northwestern Oregon is also considered in this assessment since 23 percent of visitors to the project reservoirs are from Oregon, primarily the Portland metropolitan area. The study area for the second component of the demand analysis, the recreation surveys and user counts conducted in the project area, is identified in Figure 2.0-2. This study area consists of the project reservoirs and the immediate river corridor. To address potential project-related issues in the surrounding watershed outside of the corridor, areas such as the Upper Kalama River Basin near Kalama Horse Camp were also considered. Since each of the various studies deals with a somewhat different study area, these boundaries are described individually with the study results in each appendix. In general, however, the study area for the various studies includes the Lewis River Valley from Woodland on the west to several miles up the Lewis River above Swift Reservoir on the east. It also includes areas surrounding the reservoirs from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Siouxon landscape area on the south, to areas of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest (GPNF) and Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument (Monument) on the north. Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 2-1
2-2 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02
Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 2-3
3.0 METHODS The methodology for the 2 primary components of the demand analysis is described below. These 2 components include: (1) the regional and future demand analysis, and (2) recreation studies consisting of both: user count observations and visitor/resident survey results. 3.1 Methodology for Assessing Regional and Future Demand The regional and future demand analysis provides an assessment of the demand for all recreation activities occurring in this part of Washington State. Recreation activity demand data are primarily from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation Planning (IAC) SCORP document for Region 2, as identified in the Washington Outdoors: Assessment and Policy Plan (1990-1995) (IAC 1990). IAC updated its SCORP in 1995, primarily as a policy and strategic planning update. No new statewide demand surveys were conducted for the 1995 update because the previously reported results remain valid. The IAC did, however, conduct limited demand surveys in 1990 and 1994 to determine participation in and growth of different outdoor activities and to identify the most popular outdoor recreation activities statewide (IAC 1995). The SCORP data were used to understand existing and projected recreation use, facility needs, and visitor preferences for specific activities and facilities. SCORP demand data are available by region (i.e., not by the smaller planning districts as used in the Recreation Supply Analysis). Results from ongoing survey efforts by the IAC in 1999 and 2000 will be used to validate previous projections and activity-specific demand trends (when received). The study area is influenced by the proximity of the GPNF and the Monument. Therefore, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the federal agency that administers both the GPNF and the Monument, was contacted to provide input on existing demand and future demand projections in the vicinity of the Monument and the GPNF. According to the USFS, activity-specific demand data are not available for either the GPNF or the Monument to use as the basis for projecting annual increases (pers. comm., S. Nelson, Recreation Planner, USFS, Vancouver, WA, November 22, 1996). This situation was recently confirmed again in 2000 (pers. comm., J. Nieland, Recreation Planner, USFS, Amboy, WA, Feburary 28, 2000). The USFS recommended using SCORP Region 2 data to estimate demand in the study area. However, other demand-related information was provided and is presented below. Using the SCORP data, a table was developed listing annual percentage increases in recreation use by activity type found in the study area. The results from this table were then compared with survey results that detailed existing activity participation in the study area. The results and implications of these data will be used to estimate future recreation needs in the Recreation Needs Analysis (REC 6). Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02 3-1
3.2 Methodology for Conducting Recreation Studies The second component of the Demand Analysis includes 9 individual studies detailing recreation user counts and visitor and resident survey results. User count studies documented various use levels in the study area, while recreation surveys documented existing recreation use and visitor attitudes and preferences in the study area. This multiple-year study effort included: (1) user count observations (recreation facilities, dispersed use areas, activities, vehicles, and boats); and (2) several surveys that gathered information concerning visitor characteristics, attitudes, and preferences. The primary study was a peak season Recreation Visitor Survey that estimated use levels for camping, boating, fishing, and day-use activities, as well as helping to determine visitor characteristics and attitudes. Studies of other visitors and residents in different areas or during different seasons also provided important results. Objectives of the recreation user count observations and the various visitor surveys were to: Identify the types, levels, and distribution of use per location and over time; Determine if visitors feel crowded; Determine the frequency, timing, and length of stay of visitors to the study area; Determine visitor satisfaction and factors that influence that satisfaction; Identify preferences for facility improvements and new facilities; Determine visitors willingness to pay for improved facilities; Identify demographic characteristics of the visitors; Identify factors that contribute to conflicts between users; and Identify what percentage of use may be attributable to the GPNF, Monument, or other areas. The following sections describe the methods used in each of the user counts and visitor/resident surveys that were conducted. 3.2.1 User Count Observations Methodology Overall recreation visitation was first assessed for the 4 recreation-providing areas in the study area: Lake Merwin, Yale Lake, Swift No. 2 power canal, and Swift Reservoir. Campground host counts and vehicle count data collected at PacifiCorp counters from 1996 through 2000 were used in this effort. Campground host counts were also used to assess annual, weekday, weekend, and holiday occupancy levels at PacifiCorp campgrounds. A conversion factor of 3.4 (USFS standard) was used to estimate total numbers of people at campgrounds and day-use areas based on vehicle counts. Seasonal and annual visitation were analyzed over this 4-year period. Estimates of recreation use at day-use areas, campgrounds, and dispersed use areas were calculated based on vehicle and boat counts, camp host counts, activity observations, and professional judgment. These estimates were calculated for: (1) the peak recreation use 3-2 Recreation Demand Analysis 09/29/02