Recreational Access Management Planning: Understanding Perceptions Regarding Public Forest Lands in SW Alberta


Management of recreational access on public forest lands is a complex issue of growing global importance. The provision of public recreation opportunities is part of the suite of ecological goods and services that must be considered by many forest managers. Effective access management is predicated on understanding the attitudes and perceptions of recreation users in order to predict and influence visitor behaviour and gauge the acceptance of new management strategies. Potential access management strategies vary given the nature of recreation activities and include: restricting the amount, type, and spatial distribution of use, visitor education, temporal restrictions and enhancing site durability. In this research we examined the views of recreation users on public lands in southwestern Alberta, Canada through implementation of an online survey (n = 945) with a focus on access management options. The results indicate a strong belief that the quality of the recreation experience is declining and that increased management and enforcement are required. More detailed analysis indicates that demographic and user-type variables strongly influence ideas about appropriate management. Forest managers need to engage with, understand, and respond to a wide variety of recreation user needs and preferences.

Share and Cite:

Haddock, R. and Quinn, M. (2015) Recreational Access Management Planning: Understanding Perceptions Regarding Public Forest Lands in SW Alberta. Open Journal of Forestry, 5, 387-401. doi: 10.4236/ojf.2015.54033.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (2007). Land-Use Framework Workbook Survey Results. Government of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
[2] Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (2014). South Saskatchewan Regional Plan. Government of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
[3] Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (2005). Crowsnest Forest Survey Results.
[4] ALCES Landscape and Land Use Ltd. (2012). Ghost River Watershed Cumulative Effects Study Phase 2: Beneficial Management Practices. Calgary.
[5] Andereck, K. L., Vogtisan, C. A. et al. (2001). Differences Between Motorized and Nonmotorized Trail Users. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 19, 62-77.
[6] Bath, A. J., & Enck, J. W. (2003). Wildlife-Human Interactions in National Parks in Canada and the USA. Social Science Research Review, 4, 1-32.
[7] Bosworth, D. (2003). Managing the National Forest System: Great Issues and Great Diversions. Speech.
[8] Burgin, S., & Hardiman, N. (2012). Extreme Sports in Natural Areas: Looming Disaster or a Catalyst for a Paradigm Shift in Land Use Planning? Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 55, 921-940.
[9] Clark, R. N., Stankey, G. H. et al. (1999). The Social Component of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT). Integrating Social Sciences with Ecosystem Management (pp. 237-264). H. K. Cordell and J. C. Bergstrom. Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing.
[10] Cordell, K., Owens, M., Green, G., Betz, C., Fly, M., Stephens, B., Gregory Super, G., & Thompson, F. (2004). Recreation Statistics Update No. 3: Trends and Demographics of Off-Road Vehicle Users.
[11] Creative Research Systems (2010). Sample Size Calculator.
[12] D’Antonio, A. et al. (2012). The Effects of Local Ecological Knowledge, Minimum-Impact Knowledge, and Prior Experience on Visitor Perceptions of the Ecological Impacts of Backcountry Recreation. Environmental Management, 50, 542-554.
[13] Derowiz, C. (2014). Off-Roaders Fear Being Shut Out by Southern Alberta Land-Use Plan. Calgary, AB: Calgary Herald.
[14] Driedzic, A. (2014). Managing Recreation on Public Land: How Does Alberta Compare? Edmonton, AB: Environmental Law Centre.
[15] Duda, M. D., & Nobile, J. L. (2010). The Fallacy of Online Surveys: No Data Are Better Than Bad Data. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 15, 55-64.
[16] Dwyer, J. F., & Childs, G. M. (2004). Movement of People across the Landscape: A Blurring of Distinctions between Areas, Interests, and Issues Affecting Natural Resource Management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 153-164.
[17] Eos Research & Consulting Ltd. (2009). Review of Access Management Strategies and Tools. Prepared for Foothills Landscape Management Forum, North Vancouver, BC.
[18] Epp, H. (2003a). Insights for Improving Access Management: Concluding Remarks. Access Management: Policy to Practice, Calgary, AB: Lasertext Digital Print.
[19] Epp, H. (2003b). New Approaches to Access Management Invoke Fourth Culture Biology: Introductory Remarks. Access Management: Policy to Practice, Calgary, AB: Lasertext Digital Print.
[20] Farrand, A. et al. (2003). A Federal Regulatory Perspective on Access Management. Access Management: Policy to Practice, Calgary, AB: Lasertext Digital Print.
[21] Fiera Biological Consulting Ltd. (2013). Oldman Watershed Headwaters Indicator Project—Draft Report (Version 2013.3). Edmonton.
[22] Fitzhenry, R., & Chavez, D. (2005). Wenatchee National Forest Off-Road Vehicle (ORV) Trails. Off-Highway Vehicle Use and Collaboration: Lessons Learned from Project Implementation. L. Fisher, USDA Forest Service: 70-74.
[23] Flood, J. P. (2005). Just Don’t Tell Me No: Managing OHV Recreational Use on National Forests. Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, Bolton Landing, New York, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station.
[24] Haddock, R. (2010). Assessing Mechanisms for Engagement in Access Management for Public Lands in Southwestern Alberta. Faculty of Environmental Design. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary. Master of Environmental Design (Environmental Science), 137.
[25] Hair Jr., J. F. et al. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[26] Hammitt, W. E., & Cole, D. N. (2015). Wildland Recreation: Ecology and Management. Toronto, ON: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[27] Hunt, L. M., & Dyck, A. (2011). The Effects of Road Quality and Other Factors on Water-Based Recreation Demand in Northern Ontario, Canada. Forest Science, 57, 281-291.
[28] Jackson, E. L., & Wong, R. A. G. (1982). Perceived Conflict between Urban Cross Country Skiers and Snowmobilers in Alberta. Journal of Leisure Research, 14, 47-62.
[29] Joslin, G., & Youmans, H. (1999). Effects of Recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. M. C. o. T. W. S. Committee on Effects of Recreation on Wildlife, 307.
[30] Kaae, B. C. (2010). Good Practice in European Recreation Planning and Management. Management of Recreation and Nature Based Tourism in European Forests (pp. 175-286). U. Probstl et al. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
[31] Kil, N. et al. (2012). Identifying Differences between Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) and Non-OHV User Groups for Recreation Resource Planning. Environmental Management, 50, 365-380.
[32] Knight, R. L., & Gutzwiller, K. J. (1995). Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence through Management and Research. Washington DC: Island Press.
[33] Kuentzel, W. F., & Heberlein, T. A. (2003). More Visitors, Less Crowding: Change and Stability of Norms over Time at the Apostle Islands. Journal of Leisure Research, 35, 349-371.
[34] Martin, S. R. (1999). A Policy Implementation Analysis of the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program: Convergence of Public Sentiment, Agency Programs, and Policy Principles? Journal of Park and Recreation Management, 17, 15-34.
[35] Marzano, M., & Dandy, N. (2012). Recreationist Behaviour in Forests and the Disturbance of Wildlife. Biodiversity & Conservation, 21, 2967-2986.
[36] Matthews, L. D. S., & Quinn, M. S. (2003). Access Management and Planning for Recreation in Southeastern British Columbia. Access Management: Policy to Practice, Calgary, AB: Lasertext Digital Print.
[37] Mihell, K., & Hunt, L. M. (2011). Understanding Residents’ Desired Approaches to Manage Forest Access Roads: A Case from Northeastern Ontario, Canada. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 41, 1808-1818.
[38] O’Neill, K. M. (2005). Can Watershed Management Unite Town and Country? Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal, 18, 241-253.
[39] Rea, L. M., & Parker, R. A. (1997). Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.
[40] Schuster, R. M. (2007). Outdoor Recreation Management: Today’s Actions and Tomorrow’s Expectations. Journal of Forestry, 105, 375-376.
[41] Shindler, B. et al. (2011). Public Perceptions of Sagebrush Ecosystem Management in the Great Basin. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 64, 335-343.
[42] Silvatech Consulting Ltd. (2008). Chief Mountain Study Executive Report. Calgary.
[43] Society of American Foresters (2008). Dictionary of Forestry. Retrieved 1 February 2015.
[44] St. Arnaud, N. (2004). Planning for Recreation on Public Lands: An Examination of the Livingstone River Valley. Faculty of Environmental Design. Calgary: University of Calgary. Master of Environmental Design (Planning).
[45] Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
[46] Trombulak, S. C., & Frissell, C. A. (2000). Review of Ecological Effects of Roads on Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities. Conservation Biology, 14, 18-30.
[47] Urban Futures (2012). A Context for Change Management in the Calgary Regional Partnership Area: Future Population, Housing, Labour Force, and Employment.
[48] US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution and the Morris K. Udall Foundation (2005). Off-Highway Vehicle Use and Collaboration: Lessons Learned from Project Implementation. 95.
[49] USDA Forest Service (2006). Unmanaged Recreation. Retrieved 11 January 2015.
[50] van Riper, C. J. et al. (2010) Perceived Impacts of Outdoor Recreation on the Summit of Cascade Mountain, New York. Adirondack Journal of Environmental Studies, 16.
[51] Waight, C. F., & Bath, A. J. (2014). Recreation Specialization among ATV Users and Its Relationship to Environmental Attitudes and Management Preferences on the Island of Newfoundland. Leisure Sciences, 36, 161-182.
[52] White, D. et al. (2008). Effects of Place Identity, Place Dependence, and Experience-Use History on Perceptions of Recreation Impacts in a Natural Setting. Environmental Management, 42, 647-657.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.