L ANDS ADJACENT TO BANFF TRAILS STUDY Copies of this report may be obtained from: Banff National Park Park Planner Parks Canada Banff National Park P.O. Box 900 Banff, AB, T1L 1K2 A copy of this report may be viewed at Banff National Park Library Warden Office Prepared by: Wayne Tucker Backcountry Recreation Specialist Banff, Jasper, Kootenay, Waterton Lakes, Glacier and Mount Revelstoke National Parks Box 220 Radium Hot Springs BC V0A 1M0 Tao Gui Human Use Database Specialist Banff National Park P.O. Box 900 Banff, AB, T1L 1K2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study is part of the Lands Adjacent to the Town of Banff (LATB) planning project. This report contains results of the trail monitoring conducted from early June to late September 2001. The goal of the study was to measure and describe human use on trails located on the north side of the Trans Canada Highway and of five wildlife underpasses that allow people to access those areas. The area near the Town of Banff is important socially and ecologically. Residents and park visitors use the area for recreation and learning about Banff National Park. The Town of Banff is located within the Bow Valley and is adjacent to a variety of important habitat types and linkages (corridors) to other key areas. In order to provide effective human use management it is essential to understand existing patterns of recreational use in peripheral areas of the Town of Banff, in relation to the ecological and social values that have been expressed for the area. The objectives of this study were to understand the temporal and spatial patterns of use on select trails in the Lands Adjacent to Banff study area. KEY FINDINGS August was the busiest month on the trails within the study area. The use of the underpasses is much more sustained into the fall than the surrounding trails. The seasonal variations of use in the underpasses are less dramatic. There was very little detectable difference between group sizes throughout the study period. Human use of the trails and the underpasses is greatest between 8 am and 6pm (80% for the trails, 72% for the underpasses). There is a definite temporal pattern of use within the underpasses. During non-daylight hours (10pm to 7am) the human trail use within the underpasses, based on percentage of total human use, was 0% - Edith, 2.9% - Vermillion, and 2.2% - Buffalo. For those same underpasses during the same hours, the use of the wildlife trackbeds, relative to the percentage of total use were 22.7% - Edith, 33.3% -Vermillion and 16.8% - Buffalo. i
L ANDS A DJACENT T O B ANFF TRAILS S TUDY contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...i BACKGROUND...1 GOAL...1 STUDY AREA...2 METHODS...3 trail counters... 3 remote cameras... 3 data management... 6 RESULTS...7 basic seasonal patterns - trails... 7 group size by trail... 8 basic seasonal patterns - underpasses... 9 basic temporal patterns - trails...10 basic temporal patterns - underpasses...11 differentiating the use of the underpasses...12 CONCLUSIONS...15 RECOMMENDATIONS...15 APPENDIX i: STUDY SCHEMATICS...16
BACKGROUND A strategic goal of the 1997 Banff National Park Management Plan is to prepare a Human Use Strategy for Banff National Park. The overall intent of the Strategy is to identify social or human use objectives that complement ecological management goals identified in the park management plan. The area near the Banff townsite will be a particular focus since many visitors attracted to and residing in the town of Banff are drawn to the adjacent landscape for recreational purposes. These recreational opportunities often overlap important wildlife habitat in peripheral areas of the town of Banff. As a result, the Lands Adjacent to the Town of Banff (LATB) planning project was initiated. Understanding human use of the land peripheral to the Banff townsite is critical in order to set management objectives that meet human use and ecological needs. To describe existing patterns of human use in peripheral areas of the town of Banff, four social science research projects were conducted in 2001: trail inventory, recreational trail use monitoring, motorist day-use area survey, and a Banff resident trail recreation survey. This project, the Lands Adjacent To Banff Trails Study, the in conjunction with Trails Inventory mapping project; the Banff Residential Recreational Trail Survey; and, the Motorized Day Use Area Exit Survey this project contributes to a better understanding of the use of the Lands Adjacent to Banff. GOAL The goal of the trails study was to measure and describe recreational use patterns on trails and wildlife crossing structures located on the north side of the Trans Canada Highway, within the LATB study area. 1
STUDY AREA The study area is peripheral to the Town of Banff boundary, comprising approximately 18,437 ha. It extends west from the Lake Minnewanka day-use area and causeway to the Fireside picnic site adjacent to Five-Mile Creek. It includes the montane valley bottom between those points, and is bounded to the north by the Banff Mount Norquay Ski Area and the Norquay-Cascade Wildlife Corridor. The southward extension of the study area extends part way up the adjacent mountains slopes of Sulphur Mountain, Mount Rundle, and abuts Harvie Heights, Municipal District of Bighorn, to the east. The study area is one of the most developed areas in Banff National Park. It includes a portion of the TransCanada Highway (TCH) and CP Rail, campground facilities, outlying commercial accommodations, a golf course, and several day-use areas (e.g. Sulphur Mountain Gondola, Upper Hot Springs, Sundance Canyon, Cave and Basin, Vermilion Lakes, Fireside, Cascade Ponds, C- Level Cirque, Bankhead, Johnson Lake, and Lake Minnewanka). The Norquay Ski area is excluded form the study area since the future management of this area will be addressed through the long range planning for ski areas. 2
METHODS trail counters The equipment used for the study is comprised of TrailMaster infra-red TM-1500; BIOS Systems trackpads, BIOS Systems Infra-red (IR) counters, and a BIOS System remote camera Trail counting equipment was set-up at the locations identified in Table one. The locations allow Parks Canada to depict how select trails on the North side of the highway, and the underpasses are being used. The key considerations for the counter locations are: they will not be obvious to the public, so as to minimize potential vandalism; they will not double count individuals; they will accurately count people travelling at various speeds (areas of relatively flat trails so bikers are not at high speed and avoid detection of the counter); natural interference, such as moving branches and wind events will not influence the counts; The use at that point on the trail is relative to the trail section being studied (i.e. the counter is not so close to the start of the trail that it captures people who do not wander up the trail. This is a particularly important for counters near parking lots and day use areas, where people tend to travel five minutes up the trail before returning to their car). remote cameras Remote cameras will be used to differentiate the types of use on the trails. It was not possible to collect enough visual data to defensible differentiate the proportional type of recreational use of the trails. Measures were taken to ensure that individuals privacy was protected. The photos taken will not be used for purposes outside of this study. 3
Table one: trails and underpasses included in the 2001 study Location Description Start dates End dates Edith Pass Cory Pass Counter was placed approximately 100m from junction of Cory Pass trail leading to the lower trail to Edith Pass. Counter was placed approximately 500m upslope from the junction with Edith Pass. It was located in the first major tree cluster on the south-facing slope. 07 June 23 Sep 07 June 23 Sep Stony Squaw Lower* Counter was placed approximately 250m from the entrance of the trail off the TCH. 08 June 03 Oct Stony Squaw Upper* Counter was approximately 300 upslope from the trail entrance at the east end of the Norquay ski area parking lot. 07 June 12 Oct Trails north of the TCH Forty Mile connector (Norquay entrance) Forty connecting Cascade (Creekside) The counter was approximately 2.5km from the Norquay ski lodge on the upper trail to Forty Mile creek. The counter was on the trail adjacent to Forty Mile creek. Approximately 1km from the junction of the main Forty Mile Creek and a small trail leading to the Cascade Amphitheatre trail. The counter was approximately 300m from the junction of Forty Mile creek and unnamed creek from Elk Lakes (Cascade Amphitheatre trail). 07 June 20 Sep 07 June 20 Sep Forty-Mile On the north side of Forty Mile creek, approximately 400m from the bridge. 07 June 12 Sep Cascade entrance (Grouse) The lower trail to Cascade Amphitheatre, approximately 500 m from the bug bridge crossing Forty Mile Creek 07 June 12 Sep Cascade Amphitheatre Approximately 300m from the main trail to Elk Lakes, on the fifth switchback. 07 June 07 Oct Cascade ponds Johnson Lake Cascade ponds Lower Bankhead On the trail to Johnson Lake form the Cascade Ponds picnic area. Approximately 250m from main picnic area. On the trail to Lower Bankhead from the Cascade Ponds picnic area. Approximately 200m from the main picnic area. 22 June 04 Oct 22 June 10 Oct Edith-Cory IR and trackpad set-up 06 July 31 Dec Highway Underpasses Vermilion* IR and trackpad set-up 06 July 31 Dec Buffalo* IR and trackpad set-up 06 July 31 Dec Cascade Ponds IR set-up 24 July 31 Dec Powerhouse IR set-up 06 July 31 Dec 4
Counter locations 5
data management The data retrieved from the study is compiled and managed in a Microsoft Access database. The data is cleaned to remove counter events that do not represent use of a particular trail or underpass. As with any technology, the trail counters do not always accurately count, and it is therefore necessary to clean the data. Some very general rules are used to clean the data, along with specific rules at particular study locations. All trail counter events are consolidated into two-minute or five-minute intervals, depending on the specific site. The two (or five)-minute grouping is based on social research that defines a group. If individuals are more than two-minutes apart as they travel we have determined that they are not in a single group at that time 1. Group size will be based on the two-minute time interval. All trail events $20 in a two minute period are deleted, as it is extremely unlikely that for the trails within the study that groups $20 would be travelling there and considered to represent erroneous data. For dates when data was not collected (technological issues) estimates of use will be presented based on strict rules. The rules apply to all of the counters and are based on the volume of use at any of the locations (i.e. for busy trails the estimation are based on seven days prior and after the counter failing). Estimates are only included if the time period over which the counter was not working is less than five days. The missing data will be replaced with estimate data that is the median value of counter events on the five days previous and post counter failure. For the underpass data, specific rules were developed to present the data. The rules are based on the study design and goals of the research. 1 Tucker, W. 2001. Preliminary Evaluation of Restricted Access as Applied during summer 2000. Unpublished Parks Canada report. 6
RESULTS Presented in this document are only some of the key findings of the study as it would not be feasible to present all of the data collected during this study. For all of the data and associated charts, please contact the Park Planner in Banff National Park for electronic data. basic seasonal patterns - trails Generally, the purpose of the study was to understand the temporal and spatial patterns of use on the trails in the Lands Adjacent to Banff. To depict the results, a series of charts follow that indicate: the general seasonal pattern of use and the broad temporal pattern of use for trails and underpasses in the study area. The focus of the trail study was on the summer months. Presented in Figure one are the broad patterns of use over the summer study period. As identified in the chart, the number of events on the trails in July and August far exceed that of the other months in the study 2. However, for the underpasses, the same pattern is not so. The data presented in Figure three indicates a more consistent level of use. total events 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 Although the study does not include an entire year, we have a clear understanding of how the trails are used between early June and late September for most of the trails in the study area. 400 200 0 Cascade Amphitheatre Cascade Entrance Cascade Ponds Cascade Ponds to Lower to Johnson Lake Bankhead Cory Pass Edith Pass Forty Mile Forty Mile Connecting Cascade Lower Stoney Squaw Upper Forty Mile Connector Upper Stoney Squaw Figure one: monthly counter events 2 An event is any count, or group of counts, within a two-minute time interval Jun 2001 1264 139 490 392 592 223 66 819 707 Jul 2001 1642 463 499 154 1271 1113 314 200 829 1098 1581 Aug 2001 1749 623 523 182 1392 1464 702 87 462 1520 1604 Sep 2001 1085 502 531 83 827 31 381 1236 1167 7
group size by trail One of the current conversations around human use in the park is based on disturbance events. The idea of disturbances was elevated in the grizzly bear habitat effectiveness model, where trails were ranked in the park based in the suspected number of disturbances. The data presented in Figure two represents the number of counts (individuals) per disturbance, which equates to group size. During the development of the habitat effectiveness model, disturbance events were never clarified. Is an individual on mountain bike the same disturbance as a horse party of group of hikers? And, how long is the party a disturbance? In an attempt to continue that conversation, we have depicted disturbances as groups of individuals travelling together (within two minutes of each other). This allows us to focus on the average party size as a disturbance event. We have not been able to differentiate between the group size of various activity types. For the most part, there is relatively little difference between the size of groups on the various trails in the study area. The data spike for Forty Mile creek trail in September is inexplicable with the data collected. 4 2 0 Cascade Amphitheater Cascade Entrance June, 2001 3.41 2.59 1.6 1.81 2.2 1.96 2.23 2.2 2.05 1.78 2.45 July, 2001 2.46 3.01 1.65 2.07 2.28 1.87 2.75 2.84 1.48 1.81 2.62 August, 2001 2.1 2.87 1.87 2.22 2.16 2.13 2.9 2.28 1.59 1.92 2.36 September, 2001 2.22 3.24 2.91 1.73 2.38 2.06 5.17 1.62 1.59 1.79 2.2 October, 2001 2.39 2.1 1.33 1 1.8 2.31 Figure two: Group Size by Month Cascade Ponds to Johnson Lake Cascade Ponds to Lower Cory Pass Edith Pass Forty Mile Forty Mile Connecting Cascade Lower Stoney Squaw Upper Forty Mile Connector Upper Stoney Squaw 8
basic seasonal patterns - underpasses Unlike the trails in the landscape adjacent to Banff, the difference in use between summer and early fall is not as evident in the underpasses. This can likely be attributed to two key elements. The underpasses were designed and constructed to allow wildlife to cross the Trans Canada Highway. The second related element is that the use of the human use of the underpasses is likely local use rather than tourist use, therefore subject to a more sustained demand. The Buffalo, Edith and Vermillion underpasses allow people to gain access to trails such as Lower Stony Squaw, the airport and Edith and Cory Passes, and therefore likely contributes to the higher levels of use. Local equestrians use the Cascade underpass to gain access to areas such as Cascade Ponds. The average group size for the underpass events was 2.35 individuals/group, which is slightly fewer than for the trails. group events 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Edith 337 242 0 0 100 197 Vermillion 147 92 0 0 49 72 Buffalo 404 432 429 286 218 113 Cascade Pond 0 278 135 67 15 17 Power House 96 146 87 158 41 47 Figure three: underpass monthly use (groups) 9
basic temporal patterns - trails The broad temporal pattern of use for trails in the study area is depicted in Figure four. Based on the data presented in Figure four, some broad statements can be made on the temporal pattern of use for the trails studied. As would be expected, the vast majority of use occurs through the day when we would expect to see people out hiking the trails. Some of the counter locations had relatively high levels 3000 of use during the late night and early morning periods (00:00 2500 06:00). Some of this data may be wildlife using the area, it may represent some people on the trail, 2000 but it also represents some data problems. If one looks closely at 1500 the data table in Figure four, you will see that Upper Stony Squaw and Cascade Amphitheatre trail 1000 constitute the majority of late night use. We have no way to defend the data for those events, and should 500 be considered anomalies. The trail to Forty Mile creek is used quite heavily during the early morning 0800 1000. This may be attributed to the commercial horse outfitter in the area. Lower Stony Squaw is used most heavily later in the day, which may represent the use by locals as they get off work and venture outside of town for their recreational activities. counter events 0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Cascade Ponds t o Johnson Lake 2 1 1 22 1 15 8 4 6 43 56 65 107 209 190 200 135 142 109 68 58 46 13 1 Cascade Ponds t o Lower Bankhead 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 6 14 37 49 25 75 36 44 38 32 40 13 18 1 0 Upper St oney Squaw 73 12 64 16 31 3 77 29 25 159 293 418 587 624 564 464 426 223 142 151 137 25 23 34 Lower St oney Squaw 20 6 5 7 4 9 3 4 17 20 47 59 105 167 170 203 143 128 105 83 73 48 44 17 Cascade Ent rance 8 2 4 3 6 3 5 8 23 131 200 171 81 185 180 135 69 24 26 2 11 3 7 Fort y Mile Connect ing Cascade 6 1 0 0 0 5 1 2 4 16 23 50 27 33 34 13 26 11 3 3 27 18 3 0 Forty Mile 2 2 1 4 1 1 1 9 12 76 111 209 123 80 123 87 100 50 20 19 11 6 5 4 Upper Forty Mile Connector 9 10 7 4 1 2 3 19 109 241 371 298 281 231 255 341 396 317 223 169 86 38 44 17 Cascade Amphit heat er 4 30 3 39 111 7 27 18 52 268 423 488 441 402 587 515 396 239 193 98 75 22 2 9 Edit h Pass 18 2 16 5 10 23 35 33 38 78 127 150 121 122 206 373 316 253 105 53 25 20 22 5 Cory Pass 14 13 2 1 1 2 4 15 68 216 481 561 470 279 233 187 194 142 97 100 73 17 12 15 Figure four: Total trail events by time of day data collected June through September 2001 10
basic temporal patterns - underpasses One of the essential questions of this study was how are the wildlife underpasses being used? There has been a great deal of study on the underpasses, and this work was meant to build on our current understanding. A specific study design and unique technologies were used to get answers to the question. Based on the study design, we were able to establish: the seasonal pattern of use; the temporal pattern of use of the underpasses; and the temporal difference in use of the human-trail and the track beds in the underpass (this was used as an approximation of wildlife and human use of the underpasses, as we asked people to use the trails and therefore stay out of the track beds) 3. The data presented in Figure five is all of the counter events (humans and wildlife) in the five underpasses included in the study, based on the time of day. Similar to the trail data presented in Figure four, there is a much greater volume of use during the daylight hours within the underpasses, however, the proportion of use during non daylight hours is much greater in the underpasses. total group events 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 figure five: all underpass events data collect June through December 2001 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Power House Cascade Buffalo Vermilion Edith 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 3 For complete study design details see Tucker, W. 2001. Monitoring Human Use near the Town of Banff study design. Unpublished report. Parks Canada 11
differentiating the use of the underpasses The underpass study was designed to differentiate between the use of the human trail (as captured by the track pad counters [pads]), and the wildlife track beds (as captured by the Infra-Red counters [IR] 4 ). Illustrated in Figure six are the results of all the data collected throughout the study. It is important to focus on the pattern of use above the volume of use. The expected pattern of use was that the wildlife track beds would have a different temporal pattern of use than the human trails in the underpasses. We suspected that the human trails would have a similar temporal pattern of use as other trails in the Park. The results support our suspicions. Illustrated by the data presented in chart six are the specific temporal patterns for the use of the trail (human) and trackbed (wildlife) in the underpass where we were able to have both types of counters. The bars in the chart are the trail use (human) and the lines are trackbed use (wildlife). We know that people do not always use the trail, just as the wildlife do not always use the trackbed, however, based on the data collected it is obvious that there is a different pattern of use. We are unable to explain the overlap in the trackbed (IR-PAD) and the trails (trackpad) within the underpass at this point. Future study should assist in understanding such overlaps. total group events 80 60 40 20 0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Edith PAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 11 19 42 44 27 38 24 30 26 23 12 17 11 0 0 Buffalo PAD 0 2 1 5 0 3 3 11 24 19 41 57 89 78 74 44 43 49 44 57 49 30 3 2 Vermillion PAD 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 3 10 14 14 9 16 6 7 5 0 5 4 2 0 0 Edith IR-PAD 2 3 3 4 4 10 11 15 7 15 27 10 14 17 9 14 7-1 10 2 8 10 19 7 Buffalo IR-PAD 6 5 4 17 5 4 18 21 19 19 26 28 18 27 19 27 13 30 26 15 18 10 19 4 Vermillion IR-PAD 2 3 4 3 4 8 8 8 8 5 12 6 6-1 5 1-1 3 1-1 2 0 2 5 Figure six: Underpass Pad Counters and IR-Pads data collected June through December 2001 4 The IR counters count everything in the underpass. In order to determine the use of just the wildlife track beds, the total track pad counts must be subtracted from the total IR counts. 12
From our observations and data collected throughout the study, we feel that the use of the trails within the underpass is primarily human use. Occasionally an animal will walk along the trail, however, we feel that it is unlikely and a relatively rare occurrence. Signs and infrastructure focus people to use the trail rather than the track bed, and therefore became our basis for determining human use from wildlife use. Undoubtedly, people do use the track beds, however, based on our observations and discussion with individuals working with Dr. Clevenger, we feel that the patterns presented accurately illustrate how the underpasses are used. There is likely a relationship between the effect of the volume of human use and the time of day(behaviours of the individuals), on the willingness of various wildlife species to use the underpasses. We have not yet been able to describe the relationship. The trackbed counters captured significantly more use during non-daylight hours than did the pads, suggesting that wildlife use the underpass during that time period. The trackbed counts throughout the day can be explained as the result of people (hikers, bikers and equestrians) using the trails, and some wildlife also travelling through in the day. The technological and set-up problems, the IR counter did not always capture all of the events counted by the Pad, contribute to the need for not focusing on the total events. Regardless of this issue, we have been able to understand the temporal differences between the trails and the wildlife trackbeds for the three underpasses in the study. 13
specific underpasses The data presented in charts seven a, b, and c, more clearly illustrates the temporal patterns of use in the underpasses. The IR counts are significantly higher than the pad counts during non-daylight hours. This indicates that the human trails are used less during this time of day and that the wildlife track beds are used to a greater degree. The data illustrated in chart seven d reflect a similar volume of use difference throughout the day. Primarily equestrians use the Cascade underpass. cumulative group events/hour 50 40 30 20 10 0 0:00 1:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 23:00 Edith PAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11 42 44 27 24 30 26 12 17 11 0 Edith IR-PAD 2 3 4 4 10 15 7 15 10 14 17 14 7-1 2 8 10 7 cumulative group events/hour 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0:00 1:00 2:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 22:00 23:00 Buffalo PAD 0 2 1 0 3 3 11 24 41 57 89 78 74 43 49 44 57 49 3 2 Buffalo IR-PAD 6 5 4 5 4 18 21 19 26 28 18 27 19 13 30 26 15 18 19 4 Figure seven a: Edith Underpass Figure seven b: Buffalo Underpass cumulative group events/hour 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0:00 1:00 3:00 4:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 10:00 11:00 13:00 14:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 20:00 21:00 23:00 Vermillion PAD 0 3 0 0 1 2 4 10 14 9 16 7 5 0 4 2 0 Vermillion IR-PAD 2 3 3 4 8 8 8 12 6-1 5-1 3 1 2 0 5 Figure seven c: Vermillion Underpass cumulative group events 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0:00 1:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 23:00 Cascade 2 3 1 4 1 2 5 33 60 114 33 64 24 2 4 1 Power House 10 9 8 9 15 20 12 23 21 61 91 52 20 21 19 13 17 7 Figure seven d: East end Underpasses 14
CONCLUSIONS Through this study, we have gained a great deal of new information on the temporal and seasonal pattern of use on the trails and underpasses in the lands adjacent to Banff. For Parks Canada to move ahead with changing the influences that we have on the lands around the Town of Banff, the type of information collected through this study is critical. The seasonal patterns of use identified through this work are very consistent with what was expected. The busy summer hiking months of July and August far exceed the volume of use during other times of the year. For the wildlife underpasses however, the seasonal difference is not as evident, although use did decrease as the seasons changed from fall to winter, the change was not as dramatic. The temporal patterns of use identified through the study also were very consistent with expectations. It makes sense that trails would be busier during the early afternoon, than they would be late at night. One critical piece of knowledge gained through the study was the temporal difference in use of the underpasses. Humans used the trail in a manner that is consistent with other trail data collected, however, the trackbeds were used proportionally more during the non-daylight hours. These findings supports the idea that wildlife do not use the underpasses when people use them. This is likely not the only explanation of the difference, however, it is pattern that can be supported by the data collected through the study. RECOMMENDATIONS The trails monitoring efforts applied to the areas on the north side of the highway within the LATB study area should be repeated in the areas on the south side of the highway. Particularly in areas in which there are specific of ecological concern. More emphasis should be placed on counter validation as a means to better describe the type of use. A second year of study within the underpasses should be completed, as this would increase confidence in articulating the human use within the underpasses. Formal data linkages should be established between the human use and wildlife data collected within the underpasses. There was an initial attempt at this, however, it was not fully explored. 15
APPENDIX i: STUDY SCHEMATICS 16
17
18