River Recreation Management Plan Decision-making Process

This outline is intended to give an overview of FOAM's recommendations for implementation of a pro-active step-by-step process to develop river recreation management strategies for individual Montana streams.  Various sources of research, management history, and social theory were used in developing this outline, among them such well-known management and analysis systems as ROS (Recreational Opportunity Spectrum), LAC (Limits of Acceptable Change), VIM (Visitor Impact Mgt.), and VERP (Visitor Experience and Resource Protection).

1) Obtain use data
Conduct an inventory of pre-management user groups and use levels to clearly identify existing user groups and provide raw use numbers.

2) Determine and/or consider R.O.S. (Recreational Opportunity Spectrum)
Based on the user/use inventory, determine the ROS for the river or appropriate sections.

3) Set quality indicators
Identified user groups and managing agencies should be carefully and objectively polled for the indicators of individual values they consider important for their use experience or management expectations.  Along with ROS determinations, biophysical characteristics and considerations, either river-wide or by river segment, should be identified to set a background level of possible quality standards.  User indicators typically involve types and levels of use while management mandates, legal directives, and financial or personnel resource limitations provide agency expectations.

3a) Use crowding and/or conflict characteristics* to help determine experience indicators
Part of use and management expectations involve thresholds of crowding and/or conflict that challenge or frustrate value indicators developed in step 2.  Care should be taken to avoid purely subjective valuations of both crowding and conflict, balancing these valuations with objective use data from step 1 coupled with biophysical characteristics from step 2 when setting experience indicators and eventual quality standards.  Keep a diversity of opportunity in mind, too.

4) Set quality standards
From data (step 1) and value indicators (step 3), set use-quality standards as management goals.

5) Develop thresholds for use based on the quality standards derived from the quality indicators
Use thresholds can have three components, variously described as "social, environmental, and managerial."  Thinking of these components as sources of quality standards and as solutions is helpful, particularly when associated with steps 3 and 4 above and, eventually, step 7 below.

6) Compare current use data with proposed use thresholds derived from quality indicators to identify areas of concern warranting management adjustments.

7) Develop management techniques to manage use within use thresholds think LAC)

8) Set objective criteria and mechanisms to monitor and evaluate the success of management techniques
Monitor the management techniques, gauge how well they satisfy indicators of quality and achieve the standards of quality.  Make adjustments as necessary, keeping in mind changing indicators and standards over time.

Notes:  From FOAM's point of view, other than for fishing license fees, state residency should have no place in determining or applying management techniques.  We also think commercial controls should embrace free market, competitive principles, and regulation should target recreational users, not commercial service providers.  FOAM advocates impartial, minimal regulatory schemes set only in areas and times requiring adjustment or restriction based on objective data that shows use levels or type that exceed standards and management goals set with justifiable, rational normative experience indices.

* As noted in Jacob & Schreyer, 1980, conflict can be described as "goal interference attributed to another's behavior."  In FOAM's experience, the mere presence of fishing outfitters represents "conflict" for certain users.  Similarly, any number of fishing outfitters encountered in a period of time or a stretch of river is perceived as "crowding." Almost identical responses are logged when nonresidents or non-angling recreationists are encountered by residents.  We urge careful consideration of such very real, yet decidedly subjective indicators keyed on any user or service provider group when developing use thresholds and normative standards of experience.

 

fishing   applications   faq   news   about   contact