Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Emily J. Wilkins

Publications and source records attributed to Emily J. Wilkins.

25 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Support for management actions to protect night sky quality: Insights from visitors to state and national park units in the U.S.

Light pollution is a global phenomenon where anthropogenic light sources continue to grow unabated, affecting both social and ecological systems. This is leaving parks and protected areas as some of the last vestiges of naturally dark environments for protecting views of the night sky. Yet, even parks and protected areas have outdoor lighting. Alternative lighting practices are needed to reduce or prevent light pollution from within parks. However, making parks darker may not be desirable for some visitors if they believe it will reduce navigability, safety, or restrict how they recreate (e.g., requiring the use of red-light flashlights after dark and before dawn). How visitors will respond to alternative lighting practices that park managers can implement is still unknown. We used an on-site intercept survey at nine state and national park units in Utah, U.S. , to investigate nighttime visitors' support or opposition to management actions to protect night sky quality and their interest in learning about topics related to night skies. Further, this study also segmented visitors into two groups: those ‘dependent’ on the dark sky as a resource and those whose activities did not depend on a dark sky. Defining what a ‘dark sky dependent’ visitor is, which has yet to be done in the literature, is a fundamental step to furthering night sky research and management efforts. Across nine parks and protected areas, 62% of nighttime visitors participated in dark sky dependent activities. Findings indicate broad support for management actions designed to improve night sky quality, with between 74% and 89% of all visitors supporting seven different management actions. There was stronger support from dark sky dependent visitors for some elements of alternative lighting practices, but there was still strong support for those who do not participate in dark sky dependent outdoor recreation. Additionally, between 57% and 75% of visitors were interested in learning more about topics related to night skies. This research indicates most visitors would welcome actions to preserve the quality of the rapidly dwindling naturally dark experiences offered by parks and protected areas.

Utah↗

What is “big data” and how should we use it? The role of large datasets, secondary data, and associated analysis techniques in outdoor recreation research

With researchers increasingly interested in big data research, this conceptual paper describes how large datasets, secondary data, and associated analysis techniques can be used to understand outdoor recreation. Some types of large, secondary datasets that have been increasingly used in outdoor recreation research include social media, mobile device data, and trip reports or online reviews. First, we give a brief overview of big data terms and outline the steps involved in conducting big data research. In doing so, we describe data sources and analysis techniques relevant for outdoor recreation, and review how they have been applied in previous published works. We then describe opportunities, limitations, and considerations of using big data. Finally, we outline several questions researchers may consider when designing, conducting, reporting, and reviewing outdoor recreation research using big data. Overall, big data approaches can expand our understanding of outdoor recreation and, by addressing key questions, may help researchers harness the strengths of big data while ensuring quality and integrity.

Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism↗

Bureau of Reclamation: Visitor satisfaction survey instructions

The purpose of the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Visitor Satisfaction Survey is to measure visitors’ opinions about BOR facilities, services, and recreational opportunities. This effort helps BOR meet requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) and other BOR and Department of the Interior (DOI) strategic planning efforts. This survey manual provides the detailed methods that BOR staff should use to conduct on-site visitor intercept surveys. This manual will help ensure that the methodologies used to collect data are clear and consistent across all recreation areas.

Report↗

Rural-urban differences in hunting and birdwatching attitudes and participation

Outdoor recreation facilitates important connections to nature and wildlife but is perceived differently across population segments. As such, we expected that current and past socio-demographic characteristics of individuals would influence intention to participate in outdoor recreation. We solicited 5,000 U.S. residents. (n = 1,030, 23% response) to describe their perceptions of hunting and birdwatching. The influence of current and childhood community size (i.e., urban-rural residence gradient) was examined as a potentially important predictor of intention to participate in hunting and birdwatching within the context of theory of planned behavior. Hunting attitudes and personal behavior control were more positive when respondents maintained a residence in rural areas. Alternatively, birdwatching attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control did not differ with community size. Therefore, programs aimed at increasing participation in outdoor recreation should carefully consider the importance of socio-demographic variables in the context of their objectives, especially for recruiting urban hunters.

Human Dimensions of Wildlife↗

Communicating information on nature-related topics: Preferred information channels and trust in sources

How information is communicated influences the public’s environmental perceptions and behaviors. Information channels and sources both play an important role in the dissemination of information. Trust in a source is often used as a proxy for whether a particular piece of information is credible. To determine preferences for information channels and trust in various sources for information on nature-related topics, a mail-out survey was sent to randomly selected U.S. addresses ( n = 1,030). Diverse groups of people may have differing communication preferences. Therefore, we explored differences in channel preferences and trust by demographics using regression models. Overall, the most preferred channels were personal experience, reading online content, and watching visual media online. The most trusted sources were science organizations, universities, and friends/family. Channel preferences varied the most by education level and age, while source trust was most influenced by education, race, age, and size of current residence (rural-urban). The influence of demographics varied depending on the individual channel and source, with some groups preferring certain channels or sources but not others. Results are useful to consider when disseminating information on nature-related topics to a general public audience. More broadly, results also suggest spreading information using different channels and sources depending on the specific audience being targeted.

PLoS ONE↗

Does proximity to wetlands matter? A landscape-level analysis of the influence of local wetlands on the public’s concern for ecosystem services and conservation involvement

The success of landscape-level conservation depends on public support and an understanding of public opinion. However, perceptions of wetlands’ importance may differ based on proximity to a wetland. This study used a mail-out survey across the entire U.S. (n=1,030) to investigate the public’s knowledge of local wetlands, visitation to wetlands, concern over losing ecosystem services provided by wetlands, and involvement in wetlands conservation. Regression models were run to explore the impact of proximity to the nearest wetland on wetlands visitation, concern, and conservation involvement. Additionally, sociodemographics and outdoor recreation participation were tested as predictors. While proximity to wetlands did impact knowledge of wetlands in the local area and wetlands visitation, it was not directly a significant predictor of concern for wetlands ecosystem services or conservation involvement. However, wetlands visitation did increase concern for ecosystem services and conservation involvement. Furthermore, participation in birdwatching, wildlife viewing, and fishing were correlated with higher concern for ecosystems services provided by wetlands and involvement in wetlands/waterfowl conservation. Results suggest that fostering awareness of wetlands, encouraging visitation, and promoting outdoor recreation opportunities may increase support for wetlands regardless of individuals’ proximity to wetlands.

Wetlands↗

Public views of wetlands and waterfowl conservation in the United States—Results of a survey to inform the 2018 update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan

Executive Summary This report provides information from a general public survey conducted in early 2017 to help inform the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) 2018 update. This report is intended for use by the NAWMP advisory committees and anyone interested in the human dimensions of wetlands and waterfowl management. A mail-out survey was sent to 5,000 addresses in the United States, which were selected randomly in proportion to the population of each State. A total of 1,030 completed surveys representing 49 States were returned, resulting in a 23 percent overall response rate. When comparing the demographics of the respondents to the U.S. census data, this sample overrepresented people who are male, older, highly educated, and white. Data were weighted on gender and age to make the results more representative of the overall U.S. population. Additionally, this sample had higher participation rates in all wildlife-related recreation activities than has been found in previous studies; this indicates there may have been selection bias, with people interested in nature-related topics more likely to complete the survey. Therefore, results likely represent a segment of the U.S. public that is more oriented toward and aware of wildlife and conservation issues than the general public as a whole. Because of this bias, responses for each question were also broken down by recreationist type (hunters, anglers, wildlife viewers, and no wildlife-related recreation). Additionally, responses for each question were split by administrative flyway (Atlantic, Central, Mississippi, Pacific) and residency (urban, urban cluster, rural) to better understand the different groups. Most respondents knew of wetlands in their local area or community, and more than half had visited wetlands in the previous 12 months. Of those who had visited wetlands, the most common reasons were for walking/hiking/biking and enjoying nature/picnicking. In addition, this sample was very concerned about the reduction or loss of ecosystem services resulting from wetlands degradation or loss. A majority of respondents were somewhat or very concerned about 9 out of 10 wetlands benefits, with hunting opportunities being the only benefit the majority of people were not concerned about. People were the most concerned about clean water, clean air, and providing a home for wildlife. In contrast, people were least concerned about hunting opportunities and wetlands providing scenic places for inspiration or spiritual renewal. Communication about wetlands that focuses on habitat, clean air, and clean water may resonate with the widest variety of people. However, if communication is targeted toward wildlife-related recreationists, including more information about the recreation benefits of wetlands and emphasizing habitat benefits may be the most effective. Many people reported having participated in conservation behaviors in the last year. The most popular activity was making the yard more desirable to wildlife, with more than three-fourths of respondents participating, followed by donating money to support wildlife/habitat conservation and talking to others in their community about conservation issues. There was lower participation in conservation behavior specifically related to wetlands and waterfowl, with two-fifths of respondents voting for candidates or ballot issues to support wetlands/waterfowl conservation and one-third advocating for political action to conserve wetlands/waterfowl. In order to better understand how to reach out to the public on nature-related topics, preferences in information channels and trust in information sources were explored. Respondents were mostly likely to want to receive their information through personal experience, by reading or accessing online content, and through watching visual media online. People were least likely to want to receive information through listening to recorded audio media, attending educational opportunities, and listening to live audio media. These results emphasize the importance of having content available online in an easily accessible and appealing format. Visual media in particular seems to be preferred across a wide variety of people. Additionally, people had the highest trust in scientific organizations, universities/educational organizations, and friends/family/neighbors/colleagues. The least trusted sources were national media/news, religious organizations, and local media/news. Urban respondents had higher trust levels overall, particularly for the government. Hunters and those in rural areas had lower levels of trust in the government but higher trust in family/friends. In this sample, few respondents reported hunting waterfowl (5 percent) or hunting other game (16 percent) in the last year. Additionally, few respondents said they were very or somewhat likely to hunt waterfowl in the following 12 months. Even after considering that self-selection bias would make it more likely for hunters to respond to the survey, the relatively small number of respondents who identified as hunters reinforces that engagement of other wildlife-related recreationists is critical to meeting the third goal of the NAWMP 2012 revision—to increase numbers of wetlands/waterfowl conservationists. Many people also had negative perceptions of hunting. Half of the respondents stated that hunting would be unpleasant, and two-fifths believed hunting would be boring. In contrast, people had more favorable attitudes toward birdwatching, with only one-sixth saying it would be unpleasant and less than one-third saying it would be boring. A majority of respondents thought they could easily go hunting or birdwatching in the following 12 months. Overall, people had much more positive views toward birdwatching and expressed fewer barriers to participating in it. When asked what would prevent them from hunting, the most frequently stated reasons were moral opposition, no interest, personal health, and time constraints; for birdwatching, the most popular responses were nothing, no interest, and time constraints. These responses indicate it may be beneficial to move beyond hunting and find ways for other groups, such as birdwatchers, to play a more active role in conservation. Although not many people hunted and many people tended to have negative attitudes toward hunting, over three-fourths of people said they knew a hunter. Given that wildlife viewers, those who did not participate in wildlife-related recreation, and urban residents tended to have negative attitudes toward hunting and (or) were not interested in participating, attempting to recruit them to participate in hunting may not be effective. However, given how many people across all groups knew a hunter and the relatively high levels of trust people had in their friends/family, hunters may be effective ambassadors for promoting waterfowl and wetlands conservation among nonhunters. Additionally, because people had less preference for viewing waterfowl and other game birds compared to their preference for seeing hummingbirds and birds of prey, conservation efforts that extend beyond waterfowl and include other species that benefit from wetlands may have more appeal to a broader range of people.

Open-File Report↗