Middle Fork American River Project Recreation Resources Technical Working Group Meeting October 5, 2009

1 Recreation Technical Study Report Status and Schedule

2 TSR Status and Schedule REC 1 – Recreation Use and Facilities  In progress - Draft to be distributed in November. REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Surveys  Draft distributed on September 10,  Comments due on November 9, REC 3 – Reservoir Recreation Opportunities  In progress - Draft to be distributed in October.

3 TSR Status and Schedule REC 4 – Stream-based Recreation Opportunities  Draft distributed on July 24,  Comments due on September 22,  Response to comments on draft report in progress. REC 5 – Visual Quality Assessment  Draft distributed on March 27,  Comments due on May 26,  Report was finalized on August 20, 2009.

4 REC 4 – Stream-Based Recreation Opportunities TSR Status

5 REC 4 – TSR Status Draft Report Distributed on July 24, 3009 with comments due on September 22, Comments provided by four parties:  Foothills Water Network  Horseshoe Bar Fish and Game Preserve  Patricia Gibbs  Bill Carnazzo Forest Service comments are pending.

6 REC 4 – TSR Status PCWA plan for response to comments:  All comments will be addressed in a response-to-comments table.  Distribute response-to-comments table to Recreation TWG for review.  Discuss responses with Recreation TWG.  Revise report in accordance with response-to- comments table.

7 Overview of REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR

8 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Schedule  Draft TSR was distributed on September 10,  60-day review period  Comments are due on November 9, 2009.

9 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Content  Handout #1 – Table of Contents

10 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Study Objectives  Conduct a General Visitor Survey  Collect data to describe:  Current recreation activities  User characteristics  Utilize data to evaluate:  Use patterns  Visitor preferences  Demand for opportunities  Demand for new or improved developed recreation facilities  Conduct an Angler Survey at French Meadows and Hell Hole Reservoirs.

11 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Study Area  All developed Project recreation facilities.  Select dispersed concentrated use areas (DCUAs) identified in consultation with stakeholders.  Five sites located in ASRA.  Indian Bar Rafter Access (also a Project recreation facility)  Ruck-a-Chucky Campground  Mammoth Bar  Confluence Area  Birdsall/Oregon Bar Access Areas

12 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Study Implementation  General Visitor Survey was separated into two distinct survey efforts:  Form A – Designed to collect a range of demographic and activity-specific information.  Form B – Designed to collect information about visitation patterns, spending, travel destinations and routes.  Reservoir Angler Survey  Conducted as a component of the General Visitor Survey (Form A)

13 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Study Implementation  Form A Consisted of 7 Sections:  Section A-1: Background Information Section  Section A-2: Camping at Developed Sites  Section A-3: Day Use at Developed Sites  Section A-4: Day Use or Camping in Undeveloped Areas  Section A-5: Day Use along a Stream/River  Section A-6: Reservoir Recreation  Section A-7: Fishing

14 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reporting  Methods and overall results are presented in the REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR.  Results presented in the REC 2 - TSR focus on characterizing visitor demographics, experiences, and preferences by area.  Some survey results will be documented in other technical study reports, as appropriate.

15 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reporting  Handout #2 – REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSP Study Objectives, Related Study Elements, and Reports.

16 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Study Objectives Conduct General Visitor Survey Conduct Angler Survey at French Meadows and Hell Hole Reservoirs Section A-6 Reservoir Recreation Section A-7 Fishing Section A-1 General Background Information Section A-2 Camping at Developed Sites Section A-3 Day Use at Developed Sites Section A-4 Day Use or Camping in Undeveloped Areas Section A-5 Day Use along a Stream/River Results will be documented in REC 3 – Reservoir Recreation Opportunities TSR. (organized by reservoir) Results are documented in REC 4 – Stream-based Recreation Opportunities TSR. (organized by bypass and peaking reaches) Site-specific results will be documented in REC 1 – Recreation Use and Facilities Assessment TSR. (organized by Project recreation facility) Results are documented in REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Surveys TSR (organized by area). Form A General Visitor Survey Reservoir Angler Survey Form B Road and Dispersed Use Interview

17 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form A - Methods  Surveys were conducted in 2008, from Memorial Day weekend (May 24 th ) through Labor Day weekend (September 1 st ).  Surveys were administered in accordance with the schedule and protocols established in consultation with the Recreation TWG.  Any schedule or protocol adjustments were communicated to the Recreation TWG in meetings and by , and are documented in the report.

18 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form A - Results  A total of 968 people participated in the Form A surveys.  Hell Hole Reservoir Area – 255  French Meadows Reservoir Area – 316  Long Canyon Area – 51  Duncan Creek Diversion Area – 5  Ralston Afterbay Area – 58  Includes Indian Bar Rafter Access  ASRA Area – 283  Excludes Indian Bar Rafter Access  Overall participation rate was better then expected (62%).

19 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form A - Results  All survey data was entered into SPSS, a database and statistical analysis software package.  Survey data was organized into six geographic areas for analysis:  Hell Hole Reservoir Area  French Meadows Reservoir Area  Long Canyon Area  Duncan Creek Diversion Area  Ralston Afterbay Area  ASRA Area

20 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form A - Results  Survey results are presented in tables and summarized in the text, by area, and by survey section.  Example results table  Example text

21 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B - Methods  Surveys were conducted in June, July, and August,  Surveys were administered in accordance with the protocols established in consultation with the Recreation TWG.  Conducted in an interview format.  Survey technician utilized reference maps to help respondents identify their travel routes.  Objective was to collect a total of 100 surveys throughout the study area.  Form B was not administered in ASRA, per the study plan.

22 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B - Results  A total of 110 people completed Form B.  Hell Hole Reservoir Area – 32  French Meadows Reservoir Area – 48  Long Canyon Area – 0  Duncan Creek Diversion Area – 3  Ralston Afterbay Area – 27  Includes Indian Bar Rafter Access

23 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B - Results  All survey data was entered into SPSS.  Survey data were organized into four areas for analysis:  Hell Hole Reservoir Area  French Meadows Reservoir Area  Duncan Creek Diversion Area  Ralston Afterbay Area

24 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B - Results  Results presented in the REC 2 - TSR focus on:  Visitation patterns (timing, frequency)  Road use  Areas visited during trip  Spending  Data collected through this survey effort will also be used in the LAND 1 – Transportation System TSR.

25 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B - Results  Survey results are presented in tables and summarized in the text, by area, and by survey section.  Example results table  Example text

26 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B – Example Results  Hell Hole Reservoir Area  Number of Years Recreating in Area – average of 17.3 years  Frequency of Visits – average of 4.6 times per year  Timing of Visits  January – April: 0%  May – September: 100%  October – December: 0%  Road Use  Most of the survey participants (84%) accessed the area from Foresthill, utilizing Mosquito Ridge Road (FR 96)  Remainder (16%) accessed the area from Georgetown, utilizing Eleven Pines Road (FR 2)  Spending (n = 26, average per survey participant)  Auburn - $33.08  Foresthill - $20.77  Georgetown - $12.31

27 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B – Example Results  French Meadows Reservoir Area  Number of Years Recreating in Area – average of 17.3 years  Frequency of Visits – average of 3.4 times per year  Timing of Visits  January – April: 0%  May – September: 100%  October – December: 0%  Road Use  All of the survey participants accessed the area from Foresthill utilizing Mosquito Ridge Road (FR 96)  Spending (average per survey participant, n=42)  Auburn - $64.93  Foresthill - $14.29  Georgetown - $0

28 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B – Example Results  Ralston Afterbay Area  Number of Years Recreating in Area – average of 14.1 years  Frequency of Visits – average of 5.2 times per year  Timing of Visits  January – April: 7.4%  May – September: 100%  October – December: 3.7%  Road Use  All of the survey participants accessed the area from Foresthill utilizing Mosquito Ridge Road (FR 96) and Blacksmith Flat Road (FR 23)  Spending (average per survey participant, n=25)  Auburn - $36.12  Foresthill - $14.20  Georgetown - $0

29 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Form B – Example Results  Most people stay within the area they visited.  Hell Hole Reservoir Area (n = 32)  All respondents stayed in the Hell Hole Reservoir Area.  French Meadows Reservoir Area (n = 48)  One person went to Hell Hole Boat Ramp.  One person went to the North Fork of the American River.  One person went to Sugar Pine Lake.  Duncan Creek Diversion Area (n = 3)  One person went to an area north of Talbot Campground.  Ralston Afterbay Area (n = 27)  One person went to Big Trees.  One person (a boater) went to Ruck-a-Chucky Campground.  One person went to Folsom Lake.

30 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey - Methods  Conducted as a component of the General Visitor Survey (Section A-7)  Any survey participant who identified “fishing” as one of the activities they participated in during their visit was asked to complete Section A-7.  Focused on the following topics:  Fishing effort  Fishing location  Fishing gear  Fish species kept, caught, and released  Fishing experience  Overall satisfaction  Responses were also used to determine catch per unit effort.

31 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey - Methods  A total of 213 people completed Section A-7 of the survey form.  Of these, 170 surveys were analyzed.  Hell Hole Reservoir Area – 101  French Meadows Area – 63  Ralston Afterbay Area – 6  The remainder were not analyzed for the following reasons:  Respondent identified both Hell Hole and French Meadows Reservoirs (10)  Respondent identified both a reservoir and a river/stream (16)  Respondent identified a river/stream (16) but:  did not specify which river or stream they fished;  the stream was not a bypass or peaking reach; or  not enough responses on any one stream.  Too few responses to analyze.

32 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey - Methods  All survey data was entered into SPSS.  Data were organized by reservoir for analysis.  Hell Hole Reservoir  French Meadows Reservoir  Ralston Afterbay

33 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey - Results  Survey results are presented in tables and summarized in the text, by reservoir, and by survey section.  Example results table  Example text

34 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey – Example Results  Hell Hole Reservoir Area  Most anglers (79%) fish from a boat  Anglers reported catching a total of 451 fish.  Kokanee (52%)  Brown Trout (22%)  Rainbow Trout (16%)  Lake Trout/Mackinaw (10%)  Catch per unit effort = 0.6 fish/hour  Fishing Experience  43% of the respondents said the number of fish caught was acceptable.  52% of the respondents said that the size of fish caught was acceptable.  73% of the respondents said the variety of fish species was acceptable.  Most anglers (77%) said they were either very satisfied or satisfied with their overall fishing experience.

35 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey – Example Results  French Meadows Reservoir Area  Anglers fish from both a boat and shore.  Anglers reported catching a total of 192 fish.  Rainbow Trout (84%)  Brown Trout (6%)  Lake Trout/Mackinaw (4%)  “Not sure” (6%)  Catch per unit effort = 0.5 fish/hour  Fishing Experience  47% of the respondents said the number of fish caught was acceptable  47% of the respondents said that the size of fish caught was acceptable  51% of the respondents said the variety of fish species was acceptable  Most people (75%) said they were either very satisfied or satisfied with their overall fishing experience.

36 REC 2 – Recreation Visitor Survey TSR Reservoir Angler Survey – Example Results  Ralston Afterbay Area  Discussion relies on a limited number of surveys (n=6).  Anglers fish from both a boat and shore.  Anglers reported catching a total of 12 fish.  Rainbow Trout (11 fish)  Brown Trout (one fish)  Catch per unit effort = 0.5 fish/hour  Fishing Experience  75% of the respondents said the number of fish caught was acceptable.  60% of the respondents said that the size of fish caught was acceptable.  75% of the respondents said the variety of fish species was acceptable.  Most anglers (83%) said they were either very satisfied or satisfied with their overall fishing experience.

37 Development of Recreation-Related Management Plans

38 Collaboration Topic Schedule

39 Next Steps

40 Next Steps Next Recreation TWG meeting scheduled for November 3,  Proposed meeting topics:  Discuss REC 3 – Reservoir Recreation Opportunities TSR  Discuss whitewater boating studies on bypass reaches  Logistics  Participants  Review study form  Reporting  Discuss Visual Management Plan  Objectives  Content  Potential Measures