Recreational Use Survey Survey Results. Background Draft results presented at Oct. TEC Mtg. TEC generated several recommendations for followup work. Water.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Non-native fish monitoring activities in Glen and Grand Canyons during 2000 Dave Speas, AGFD Carl Walters, UBC Scott Rogers, AGFD Bill Persons, AGFD.
Advertisements

Chapter 3 Probability.
Basic Concepts of Probability
Larson/Farber 4th ed 1 Basic Concepts of Probability.
Cameron Faxon GIS in Water Resources 11/16/2010. Hurricane Katrina (category 3) Date of Landfall: August 29 th Point of Landfall: Buras, LA Approximately.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
8. Evidence-based management Step 3: Critical appraisal of studies
CHAPTER 23: Two Categorical Variables: The Chi-Square Test
Inference about the Difference Between the
Water Quality Standards Program Update November 29, 2007.
Applying Social Science to Outdoor Recreation Management Diane Kuehn SUNY ESF.
Midterm Review Session
The introduction of zebra mussels (ZM) into the Great Lakes and subsequently waters of the Ohio and Mississippi River Valleys, and numerous other waters.
Copyright (c) Bani Mallick1 Lecture 2 Stat 651. Copyright (c) Bani Mallick2 Topics in Lecture #2 Population and sample parameters More on populations.
Today’s Agenda Review Homework #1 [not posted]
7-2 Estimating a Population Proportion
Nutrition and Exercise Emily Bachinsky Alex Lopez Jacob Lopez Luke Pederson Rob Wolff May 15, 2013.
GS/PPAL Section N Research Methods and Information Systems A QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT - (1)DATA COLLECTION (2)DATA DESCRIPTION (3)DATA ANALYSIS.
Stakeholders’ Role in HIA Oil Drilling and Development Project in California Dr. Mary McDaniel, Kathleen Souweine, Dr. Christopher Ollson, Lindsay McCallum.
Steps in a Marketing Research Project
TEMPLATE DESIGN © m Percentage of Surface Drinking Water from Intermittent, Ephemeral, and Headwater Streams in the Continental.
BACTERIAL CONCENTRATIONS IN BULL CREEK AUSTIN, TEXAS Patrick Sejkora.
Food Advisory Committee Meeting December 16 and 17, 2014 Questions to the Committee Suzanne C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, DABT Senior Advisory for Toxicology Center.
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 22 Comparing Two Proportions.
Chapter 9 Marketing Research And Information Systems
Overview of the Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study Urban Water Institute 19 th Annual Water Policy Conference August 22-24, 2012 San Diego.
Results of the WMO Laboratory Intercomparison of rainfall intensity gauges Luca G. Lanza University of Genoa WMO (Project Leader) DIAM UNIGE September.
Data Analysis for Source ID: Examples of Statistical Methods and Results Julie Kinzelman, City of Racine Beach Management Workshop April 14 – 15, 2005,
8.1 Inference for a Single Proportion
Comparing Two Proportions
JerryHenry & A S S O C I A T E S FY 2005 Lake of the Ozarks Convention & Visitors Bureau Conversion Study Performance Analysis & Profile Prepared by Jerry.
Chapter Twelve Census: Population canvass - not really a “sample” Asking the entire population Budget Available: A valid factor – how much can we.
IRP Approach to Water Supply Alternatives for Duck River Watershed: Presentation to XII TN Water Resources Symposium William W. Wade Energy and Water.
PPA 502 – Program Evaluation Lecture 5a – Survey research.
1 CEE 763 Fall 2011 Topic 1 – Fundamentals CEE 763.
1 Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project (FERC No. 2079) Recreation Technical Working Group Meeting February 19, 2008.
Paul Novak, Ohio EPA. Committee Meetings/Agenda  March call of full committee  April meeting with IDEM, OEPA, ORSANCO on streamlined variance.
Patapsco/Back River SWMM Model Part I - Hydrology Maryland Department of the Environment.
Aim: Intro to Statistics Course: Alg. 2 & Trig. Do Now: What is statistics and why do we care? Aim: What is statistics and why do we care?
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Omaha Districts Inflow Forecast Regression Analysis Carrie Vuyovich and Steven Daly ERDC-CRREL Cold Regions.
2013 SURVEY OF CALIFORNIA HOME SELLERS. Methodology Telephone surveys conducted in August/September of 600 randomly selected home sellers who sold in.
Leona River Recreational Use Attainability Analysis Summary of Findings (First Survey Event) Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research Stephenville,
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Slide Beware: Lots of hidden slides!
Chapter Probability 1 of 88 3 © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Advocacy: Influencing Facility Development in Public Parks and Recreation Departments Tennis advocacy should occur year round through informal communications.
A comparison of different approaches to measure alcohol consumption 26 April 2006 Ola Ekholm, Karina Christensen, Katrine Strandberg Larsen and Morten.
Regional Water Availability Rulemaking Chip Merriam Water Resources Advisory Commission February 8, 2007 Chip Merriam Water Resources Advisory Commission.
What Is The Average Hours You Spend On Your Phone Daily? Cristian Barrios Jacky Cortez Maria Canongo Period 2 Year ( )
Recreational Use Survey Survey Results. Survey Objectives QUANTIFY THE RECREATIONAL USES OF OHIO RIVER. DESCRIBE THE LEVEL OF USE IN TERMS OF NATIONAL.
Chatfield Reservoir Phosphorus Budget Jim Saunders and Jamie Anthony WQCD, Standards Unit 13 Dec 2007.
Chapter 7 Estimates, Confidence Intervals, and Sample Sizes
1-1 Copyright © 2014, 2011, and 2008 Pearson Education, Inc.
Organization of statistical investigation. Medical Statistics Commonly the word statistics means the arranging of data into charts, tables, and graphs.
Bacteria Rulemaking Inclusion of Bacteria Limits in TPDES Permits.
Copyright © 2015, 2012, and 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. 1 Chapter Probability 3.
Defining Clear Goals and ObjectivesDefining Clear Goals and Objectives Barbara A. Howell, M.A. PAD 5850.
OHIO EPA UPDATE ORSANCO, October 20, 2009 George Elmaraghy, P.E., Chief.
Chapter 22 Comparing Two Proportions.  Comparisons between two percentages are much more common than questions about isolated percentages.  We often.
305B REPORT Biennial Assessment of Ohio River Water Quality Conditions.
AP Stat 2007 Free Response. 1. A. Roughly speaking, the standard deviation (s = 2.141) measures a “typical” distance between the individual discoloration.
NPDES SUBCOMMITTEE BIOLOGICAL SUBCOMMITTEE MONITORING STRATEGY FY 14 Program Recommendations.
Marketing Research Aaker, Kumar, Leone and Day Eleventh Edition
Module 24 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria
Part III – Gathering Data
US Army Corps of Engineers Life Jacket Policy Test
CEE 6640:GIS for Water Resources 11/23/2010 Naho Orita
Confidence Intervals.
Psych 231: Research Methods in Psychology
Chapter 7: Sampling Distributions
Introduction to the NVUM Program and Interviewer Training
Presentation transcript:

Recreational Use Survey Survey Results

Background Draft results presented at Oct. TEC Mtg. TEC generated several recommendations for followup work. Water Quality Review Committee considered TEC recommendations as follows:

Summary of Oct Mtg. Outcomes Issue #1: Phone survey results intuitively seem high and are high compared with field data. Water quality review Committee concerned that repeating the survey might create more uncertainty, not less. And the statistical uncertainty around phone survey results was quite low

River-Wide Comparison of Results Phone Survey Error = 1.37% at 95% Confidence. Phone Survey = 8.2 million total person days Field Survey = 5.2 million max 2.7 million avg It appears that the phone survey results may over-estimate reality (possibly by a factor of 2- 3).

Issue #2: Comparison of Ohio River Recreational Use to Beach Use Initial approach was to compare data from equivalent water body sizes (areas). Acreage of 10 mile river segment equal to average lake acreage of which beaches are located. Water Quality Review Committee recommended re-evaluating the data by comparing equivalent lengths of beaches and river.

Comparison of Use Data for Equivalent River-Beach Lengths

Why compare results to beach use data? Comparison to EPA’s criteria language: Moderate use: At least half use of typical bathing beach. Light use: Less than half use of typical bathing beach.

Primary Recreational Use

Issue #3: Need to Look at How Wet Weather Affects Recreational Use # Primary Contact Recreators # Boaters No RainRainNo RainRain During Survey Hours Prior Hours Prior

Fish Consumption Data for Inner Zone Freshwater Fish Consumption Rate 90 th percentile Inner Zone population = 37.3 gm per day. EPA’s national fish default freshwater fish consumption rate 90 th percentile general population = 17.5 gm per day. Ohio River Fish Consumption Rate 90 th percentile Inner Zone population = 1.86 gm per day. 16% (9%) of the population consumed some Ohio River fish (6% don’t know). 35% are aware of consumption advisories. 29% of those not eating Ohio River fish due to contamination.

Conclusions The frequency/density of contact recreation in the Ohio River is significantly less than at public beaches. Could have an implication for E. coli criterion. Frequency of contact recreation during April could have an implication for when criteria apply. Recreation is significantly reduced DURING rain events. Recreation is not significantly reduced when precipitation occurs hrs prior. Watershed funding may be available to conduct additional fish consumption and contact recreation studies in the future.

TEC Action Are we ready to take the information public?

10-Mile River Segment Equivalent Area to Beach Use Lake Area

Survey Objectives QUANTIFY THE RECREATIONAL USES OF OHIO RIVER. DESCRIBE THE LEVEL OF USE IN TERMS OF NATIONAL CRITERIA CATEGORIES. Beach use, moderate use, light use. DETERMINE WHEN THE USES OCCUR. Ohio River criteria apply May-Oct.

Survey Objectives QUANTIFY THE RECREATIONAL USES OF OHIO RIVER. DESCRIBE THE LEVEL OF USE IN TERMS OF NATIONAL CRITERIA CATEGORIES. Beach use, moderate use, light use. DETERMINE WHEN THE USES OCCUR. Ohio River criteria apply May-Oct.

Scope Budget set at $100 K. Additionally requested to obtain fish consumption data if feasible within budget. Put out RFP and selected proposal using a phone survey approach. Augmented with field surveys including observations and interviews.

Survey Design 5102 random telephone surveys completed. 3,865 inner zone; 1,237 outer zone.

170 Field Surveys 285 Interviews Ground-truth phone survey results. Sites every 20 miles “randomly” selected. 4-hour surveys completed 2-3 times at each location during rec season. Observational counts of recreational activities – Ground Surveys. In-person interviews – Intercept Surveys.

Results for 2008 Primary Contact Recreation

Are the numbers right & what do they mean? They are all estimates!!!

Extrapolating the Field data Surveyed 49 public access sites 2-3 times during the rec season. 4-hour observations & in-person interviews. Recorded the field of vision and counted recreators. Extrapolated the data to entire river for entire recreation season.

Beach Use Data

Why/When Don’t Recreators Recreate

Questions?