BOPCO-28657 BOP Visitor Monitoring Plan 2004-2009

8/7/2019 BOPCO-28657 BOP Visitor Monitoring Plan 2004-2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bopco-28657-bop-visitor-monitoring-plan-2004-2009 1/84

Bay of PlentyConservancy

Visitor Monitoring

Plan

2004-2009



1



2



3

Bay of PlentyConservancy

Visitor Monitoring

Plan

2004-2009

Approved by David HuntTechnical Support Manager

Prepared by James ChiltonTechnical Support (Recreation)August 2004



4



5

Contents

Executive Summary

1

1.0 Introduction

3

2.0 Goals and Objectives

4

Part One: Context and Monitoring

Methods

3.0 Plan Context

63.1 Strategic Context – National

6

3.2 Strategic Context – Conservancy

9

3.3 Visitor Numbers

10

4.0 Monitoring History

124.1 Conservancy

12

4.2 Numeric Data Collection

12

4.3 Physical Impact Monitoring

15

4.4 Social Impact Monitoring

15

4.5 Private Sector Monitoring

16

5.0 Conservancy MonitoringIssues 17

5.1 Data Collection Issues

17

5.2 High Use Sites 17

5.3 Known Physical Impacts

18

5.4 Known Social Impacts

19

5.5 Numeric Data Knowledge Gaps

19



6

5.6 Physical Impact Data Knowledge

Gaps 20

5.7 Social Impact Data Knowledge

Gaps 20

5.8 Further Research Needs

21

6.0 Visitor Monitoring Methods


22


24


246.4 Economic Value, Impact and

Benefit Studies

25

6.5 Indicators

26

Part Two: Operational Work

Programme

7.0 Visitor Monitoring

Management 307.1 Monitoring Roles

30

7.2 Adaptive Management 32

8.0 Area Monitoring Outline


33


34


34

8.4 Prioritisation35

8.5 Additional Research

35

9.0 Monitoring Sites

379.1 Numeric Data Collection Sites

37

9.2 Physical Impact Monitoring Sites

42



7

9.3 Social Impact Monitoring Sites

44

9.4 Concessionaire Data

45

10.0 Data Analysis

4610.1 Data Analysis Method

46

10.2 Data Analysis Process

46

10.3 Database Content

46

10.4 Outputs 47

11.0 Implementation Strategy

4811.1 Timing 48

11.2 Budget

48

12.0 Monitoring System Review

50

Appendices

A1 Maintenance of Resources51

A1.1 Conservation

A1.2 Recreational

A1.3 Cultural

A2 Visitor Strategy

53A2.1 Visitor impacts on

natural/historic values

A2.2 Visitor impact research

A2.3 Goals and Guiding: Principles

for protecting natural andhistoric values

A2.4 Managing the protection of

intrinsic natural and historic

values

A3 Establishing a Site’s Baseline

State 58

A4 Potential Research Topics

59



8

References and Resources

60

Document Reference: BOPCO-28657



1

Executive SummaryThis plan outlines conservancy levelstrategic direction for visitor monitoring in

the Bay of Plenty. It was prepared in

conjunction with area offices and focuses onthe implementation of a visitor monitoring programme.

The plan is in two parts. Part oneestablishes the goals and objectives, and

examines monitoring context; history and

issues within the conservancy. Part one alsoreviews conservancy monitoring knowledge gaps

and discusses monitoring methods includingnumeric data collection, physical impact andsocial impact monitoring.

Part two discusses monitoring roles. These

include area monitoring priorities; sitespecific numeric data collection, physicaland social impact monitoring locations. It

also discusses how data, once collected, is

to be analysed. The conservancy will use an Access database that has been trialled and is

in use in Southland Conservancy.

For this plan to be effective, implementation

and goal achievement are essential. This isdiscussed in part two including the requiredoperating and capital funding and the means

of plan review.





3

1.0 IntroductionThere has been no strategic direction

established for visitor monitoring in the Bay

of Plenty Conservancy (the conservancy). The

three area offices have carried out some

numeric data collection and impact monitoring

to the best of their abilities. However this

data has not been used for any specific

management purposes.

Information about visitor numbers and impacts

enables the conservancy to make rational,efficient, fair and consistent decisions when

allocating resources for recreation

management. Information on visitor use trends

is essential for planning and management to

remain responsive, objective and dynamic,

rather than static processes.

Strategic planning of visitor monitoring at a

conservancy level enables a continuity of

monitoring direction when managers and

planners are reassigned or change jobs. This

is essential, as in many cases impacts,

trends and the results of management actionsmay not be apparent for many years.

Data collection will assist management with

specific issues, such as the impact of

visitors on the physical environment.

A standard approach to visitor monitoring is

presented. Only by consistently using the

same methodology can trends be interpreted

with confidence. Standardisation within the

conservancy is of the utmost importance.

This visitor monitoring system is designed toensure that data collection, analysis and

use, are simple and relevant for all staff

involved in the process.

This plan provides clear strategic direction.

It will enable the three Area offices to

monitor with confidence and, using the

conservancy visitor monitoring database, to

accurately record and analyse this data.

Future management decisions, based on

monitoring can then be taken with confidence.



4

2.0 Goals andObjectives

2.1 Goals

To ensure that the intrinsic natural,

cultural and historic values of areas managed

by the department, in the Bay of Plenty, are

not compromised by the impacts of visitor

behaviour and visitor related facilities and

services.

To provide accurate information to managementso that appropriate management actions are

taken to sustain the intrinsic values of

conservation resources for present and future

generations.

2.2 Objectives

To determine the levels of monitoring

required between 2004 and 2009 to identify

and correct any adverse change resulting from

visitor use and effects on key sites.

To identify the relationship betweenmanagement actions and intervention,

monitoring activities and research and

investigation.

To identify and prioritise key recreational

sites which require routine numeric data

collection for the purposes of this plan.

To identify and prioritise sites requiring

social and physical impact monitoring for the

purposes of this plan.

To identify long term visitor patterns and

change over time in those patterns.

To fulfil the conservancies strategic

obligations under the Statement of Intent,

Visitor Strategy, Conservation Management

Strategy and Bay of Plenty Recreation

Strategy with regard to visitor impacts on

natural and historic sites.



5

Part One: Context and

Monitoring Methods



6

3.0 Plan Context3.1 Strategic Context –

National level

3.1.1 Conservation Act 1987

The Conservation Act describes a function of

the department as being:

The aim of this plan is ensure that visitor

numbers and activities are monitored and

managed in such a way that they are not

inconsistent with resource conservation.

3.1.2 Statement of Intent 2004-2007

The development of an effective visitor

monitoring programme for the conservancy will

progress the conservancies work with regardsto the current Statement of Intent (SOI).

The SOI states that the departmental vision

is where:

The department aims to achieve this vision

through the twin Outcomes of Protection and

Appreciation. The visitor monitoringprogramme for the conservancy contributes and

relates to both outcomes.

The first outcome, Protection, is defined as

w

h

e

r

e

‘New Zealand’s natural and historic

heritage is protected; people enjoy it and

are involved with the department in its

‘New Zealand’s natural and historic

heritage entrusted to the Department of

Conservation is protected and restored’.

‘to the extent that the use of any natural

or historic resource for recreation or

tourism is not inconsistent with its

conservation, to foster the use of natural

and historic resources for recreation, and



7

There are several ‘Intermediate Outcomes’

that contribute to the Protection Outcome,

several of these relate to reducing the loss

of natural heritage, restoring and protecting

threatened species and minimising bio-

security risks. The remaining Intermediate

Outcomes relate to the need to protect

historic heritage on conservation land in

general; and the need to protect a

representative range of historic sites in

particular.

This plan outlines the historic sites that

will be monitored. Physical impact monitoring

in all areas will also include data on the

conservancy’s historic assets. This will

contribute both to the conservancy’s historic

heritage inventory and to this SOI

departmental outcome.

The second outcome, Appreciation, is defined

a

s

wh

e

re:

There are several Intermediate outcomes that

contribute to the Appreciation Outcome that

this plan relates to generally or

specifically. These are:

A range of quality recreation

opportunities are provided and promoted

in Areas managed by the department, so

that all New Zealanders have the

opportunity to derive benefits from these

Areas.

People and concession impacts on

natural and historic heritage are

minimised.

People make significant contributions

‘ people have opportunities to appreciate

and benefit from their natural and historic

heritage and are involved and connected with conservation’.



8

This plan directly relates to the first two

Intermediate Outcomes. The SOI refers to

specific Outcome Indicators for each

intermediate Outcome and the Key Outputs that

will achieve these Outcomes.

For the first Intermediate Outcome the

indicator is defined as:

‘Change, over time, of satisfaction with the

range of recreation opportunities provided’.

To achieve this Outcome the department will:

‘Provide a range of facilities and services,

information, and monitor satisfaction with

the range of recreational facilities

provided’.

For the second, the indicator is defined as:

‘Change in the proportion of sites where

visitor and concession activity has

significant adverse effects on natural or

historic heritage’.

To achieve this Outcome the department will:

‘ Mitigate any significant adverse effects of

people and concessions on natural, culturaland historic heritage and monitor the effects

of people and concessions at selected visitor

sites’.

The monitoring of visitor numbers through

numeric data collection; physical impact

monitoring and social impact monitoring, such

as visitor satisfaction and demographic

surveys, will enable the conservancy to

produce data relevant to these Outcomes,

Indicators and Key Outputs.

In addition visitor surveys, in conjunctionwith the objectives of the recreation

development plans, will enable data to be

collected regarding the engagement of the

community in conservation. This will

contribute to the Outcomes relating to

community involvement in, and commitment to,

conservation.

3.1.3 Visitor Strategy

The Department of Conservation’s Visitor

Strategy (1996) established the future vision



9

and direction for recreation development. It

is an internal document that is intended to

guide staff in their work. The Visitor

Strategy (and this plan) defines visitors as:

‘ people visiting areas managed by the

department. They include people using visitor

centres and clients of concessionaires, New

Zealand and international visitors.’ P2

Visitor Strategy Goals

This plan relates to three of the Visitor

Strategy Goals. Specifically

Goal 1 Protection ‘To ensure that the

intrinsic natural and historic values of

areas managed by the Department are notcompromised by the impacts of visitor

activities and related facilities and

services’.

The plan will achieve this through the

monitoring of visitor activities and their

physical impacts on the natural and historic

heritage.

Goal 2 Fostering Visits ‘To manage a range of

recreational opportunities that provide

contact with New Zealand’s natural and

historic heritage; and provide a range of recreational and educational facilities and

services that are consistent with the

protection of the intrinsic natural and

historic values of Department-managed areas’.

The Visitor Strategy states that:

‘To assist the department in providing

recreational (and educational )

opportunities, appropriate visitor facilities

and an efficient, helpful and friendly

service to visitors, the department needs to

know more about visitors. In particular, it

needs to find out more about what they wantto do or know, where they go, and in what

numbers. Furthermore, improved management

depends upon knowing how satisfied visitors

are with recreational opportunities, access

arrangements, and facilities and services the

department manages on their behalf’. P21

The plan will achieve this through numeric

data collection, and social impact

monitoring, including visitor satisfaction



10

surveys and continued visitor centre

monitoring.

Goal 4 Informing and Educating Visitors. ‘To

share knowledge about our natural and

historic heritage with visitors, to satisfy

their requirement for information, deepen

their understanding of this heritage and

develop an awareness of the need for its

conservation’.

The plan will achieve this through continued

visitor centre monitoring and in conjunction

with the National Visitor Centre Strategy and

conservancy strategies for Recreation,Interpretation and Education.

Visitor Strategy Detail

The Visitor Strategy considers in detail the

issue of visitor impacts, both the

consequences and the steps necessary to

mitigate impacts on the intrinsic natural

historical values of the conservation estate.

These issues are discussed further in

Appendix Two.

Visitor Groups

Visitors to conservation lands, whetherthrough a concessionaire or self-guided, can

be categorised into a number of ‘types’ of

visitor seeking a particular experience. The

National Visitor Strategy identifies seven

distinct visitor groups.

These are:

Short Stop Travellers (SST)

Day Visitors (DV)

Over-Nighters (ON)

Back Country Comfort Seeker (BCC)

Back Country Adventurer (BCA) Remoteness Seeker (RS)

Thrill Seekers (TS)

These visitor groups will be referred to

again during the selection of sites for

monitoring in Section 9.

3.1.4 Visitor Monitoring Project

The department is currently undertaking a

visitor counter project (wgnro-20945). This

will entail the roll out of two Data





12

plans are being achieved. An example is that

if increased visitor use is leading to

detrimental physical impacts, whether these

impacts are consequently being mitigated.

Another being whether visitor satisfaction

and conservation awareness levels are being

raised.

3.2.3 EBOP Lakes Recreation Strategy

Environment Bay of Plenty (EBOP) is

developing a Recreation Strategy for the

lakes Area of the Bay of Plenty. It is the

conservancy’s intention to work closely with

EBOP. This will enable joint objectives to be

formulated and increase data pooling.

3.3 Visitor Numbers

Tourism New Zealand analyse monthly

international and domestic visitor figures,

this information is available to the public

on their website at www.tourisminfo.govt.nz

Other information on tourism patterns is

available at www.stats.govt.nz (Statistics

New Zealand’s website) and

www.tourism.govt.nz (the Ministry of

Tourism’s website).

Information from these reports will be used

by the conservancy in the annual assessment

of visitor trends. The conservancy Recreation

Strategy contains a brief analysis of future

visitor trends for the region. (See Appendix

5).



13

4.0 Monitoring History4.1 Conservancy

All past research on visitor trends in the

conservancy is held by the Recreation Planner

at the Bay of Plenty Conservancy office.


4.2.1 Rotorua Lakes Area

Track counter and campground data has been

stored on an Excel database (ROTAO-995).

Track counter information has been collected

monthly and campground data on each service

run. The data has been collected since 1998.

The data has not been used for any strategic

purpose. Sites have been monitored using

counter pads. One site (Okere Falls) was

monitored with a data compatible step counter

for four months until the counter became

inoperable.

However the lack of infrastructural support

meant that the counter has not been repaired

5 months later. This data gap has meant that

the data that was collected was of less use

than it could have been.

Track monitoring sites Asset

Number

Site

Number

Okere Falls 96523 400082

Tarawera Falls 96444 400088

Eastern Okaitaina

Walkway

96441 400091

Western Okaitaina

Walkway 96437 400101

Rainbow Mountain 99040 400258

Tarawera Outlet 10015 400093

4.2.2 Tauranga Area

Track counter and data has been stored in

paper format as part of the Area Managers

Monthly Operating Report (MOR). Track counter

information has been collected monthly. The



14

data has been collected since the early

1990’s.

The data has only been used for informal

discussion between the Area Manager and the

Conservator regarding visitor trends in the

Kaimai. Sites have been monitored with

mechanical tally counters which are

considered reliable, accurate and easy to

use. Spare counters are kept and counters

have been calibrated with a laser counter and

found to be accurate.

Track monitoring sites Asset

Number

Site

NumberLindemans Road 96453 400127

Tuahu 96407 400136

Ngamuwahine 96395 400152

Waitawheta 96438 400206

Wairongomai 96448 400189

Wairere Falls 96403 400143

Dickeys Flat – Dean

Junction

96430 400111

Crown 99005 400214

Dubbo 97784 400205

Rapurapu 96396 400151

Orokawa Bay 96435 400104

Otanewainuhu 96416 400181

Hut Books

Waitawheta 32233 400114

Daly’s Clearing 32323 400112

Hurunui 32833 400194

Te Rereatukahia 32227 400133

Kauritatahi 32403 400192

Mangamuka 32410 400193

Te Aroha 32545 400117

Mangakino 32280 400111

Motutapere 32336 400137

4.2.3 Rangitaiki Area

Track counter and Hut ticket data have been

stored on an Excel database. Track counter



15

information was collected monthly until 2002

and at random periods since on service runs.

The data has been collected since 1998.

The data has not been used for any strategic

purpose. Sites have been monitored using

counter pads. Only two counters are now

giving reliable information.

Track MonitoringSites

Asset Number Site Number

Whangatawhia

(Skips) to Okahu

Road

96627 400029

Plateau to Mid

Whirinaki Track

96675 400020

Oruiwaka Ecological

Area

96684 400010

Waiatiu Falls 96622 400039

Waterfall (Lower

Whirianki)

96681 400013

Nga Tapu Wae O Toi

w/way Fairbrother

Loop Section

96642 400051

Tuwhare Pa 96617 400050

Hut Book and Hut Ticket Collection Sites

Central Whirinaki 32521 400013

Mangamate 32700 400017

Upper Whirinaki 32769 400015

Upper Te Hoe 32568 400022

Central Te Hoe 32570 400024

Mangakahika 32677 400025

Rogers (Te Wairoa) 32668 400028

Whangatawhia

(Skips)

32214 400029

Moerangi 32674 400027

Upper Matakuhia 34249 400033

Lower Matakuhia 34250 400036

Intentions Book Sites (Intentions books are

located at all Forest Park access points)



16

Plateau to Mid

Whirinaki Track

96675 400020

Okahu Roadend 96627 400029

Oruiwaka Ecological

Area Track

96684 400010

Matakuhia 96626 400033

Road Counter Sites

River Road end

(recently destroyed)

98475 400009

Okahu Road end 98476 400032



17

4.3 Physical Impact

Monitoring


Photo impact surveys at Twin Streams and a

study completed regarding visitor impacts on

geothermal vegetation (see Ward et al, 2000).

This study concluded that although geothermal

vegetation is highly susceptible to

trampling; and that the effects of trampling

can extend 30 cm into the surrounding

vegetation on either side of the track, track

management at Waimangu and Wai-o-tapu appears

to be adequate to prevent more than minimal

damage to the surrounding vegetation.

Recommendations included:

Improving education of visitors; by improving

visitors learning about the vegetation,

impacts of inappropriate behaviour and other

components of the geothermal environment

through better interpretation.

Site management to enable visitors to take

photographs without trampling.

The study further concluded that these sitescan be used as examples of protecting the

environment while allowing access. Results

from this study should be considered and

applied to other sites. These results are not

just applicable to other geothermal sites;

but also for other sites where improved

interpretation and education of visitors can

reduce impacts by increasing their knowledge

of the consequences of their actions.

4.3.2 Tauranga Area

There has been no formal monitoring of

physical visitor impacts in Tauranga.


There has been photographic monitoring of

track damage after mountain biking events.

These photos have been kept on file at the

area office. Visitors to Moutohara Island are

checked to ensure pests are not introduced

from the mainland.



18



Visitor perception survey: in relation to

aircraft noise at Wai-o-tapu (uncompleted).

Community surveys: Geographically defined

surveys regarding recreational

use/opportunities and perceived future

development. Intention is to assimilate

recreation aspirations identified by the

community as part of the survey. Also

investigate opportunities to pursue specific

ideas of these communities such as track

proposals forwarded through the Mamaku

community survey.

4.4.2 Tauranga Area

There has been no formal monitoring of social

visitor impacts in Tauranga.


There has been no formal monitoring of social

visitor impacts in Rangitaiki.

4.5 Private Sector

Monitoring

There has been little monitoring of visitors

by concessionaires in the Bay of Plenty.

There has been some monitoring of visitor

satisfaction levels in the past in several

places in the region. However most of these

studies are dated. Copies are held in the

conservancy library.



19

5.0 Conservancy Monitoring Issues

5.1 Data Collection Issues


Problems with counter accuracy, gear failure,

vandalism, data accuracy (double counting

etc), lack of use for data and equipment

integrity (e.g. counter pads reaching end of

life, lack of national consistency, problems

of public interest and consequent vandalismwith (new) data-compatible step counters due

to public observing Rangers connecting the

data logger to them.

Numeric data collection would be easier if

the counters were reliable and easy to use

and had adequate infrastructure support.

Spare counters would overcome the issue of

lost data when counters have to be repaired.

5.1.2 Tauranga Area

Tauranga Area has had problems with the

counter pads. They have been vandalised, are

inaccurate and breakdown. The delay in the

roll out of the data-compatible step counters

and the lack of strategic direction in

relation to visitor monitoring from Head

Office has resulted in data gaps. Tauranga

staff consider numeric data collection would

be easier with remote site data transfer,

negating the need for Rangers to visit the

site. This would significantly cut the cost

of collecting data.


Rangitaiki Area has also had problems with

the counter pads, finding them inaccurate,

expensive, and prone to vandalism and

breakdown. Road counters have been

vandalised. Numeric data collection would be

easier with reliable and accurate counting

equipment.



20

5.2 High Use Sites


Site (Visitor

Group)

Okere Falls (SST)

Wai-o-tapu Mud pool (SST)

Tarawera Falls (SST)

East Okaitaina Walkway (DV)

Rainbow Mtn – Viewing Platform (SST)

Campgrounds (Seasonal high use, particularly

Tarawera Outlet Campsite)

Amenity areas/road ends (particularly

Okaitaina Roadend)

5.2.2 Tauranga Area

Kaimai-Mamaku FP

Wairongomai Tracks (DV)

Wairere Falls Tracks (BCA)

Crown Track (DV)

Ngamuwahine Picnic Area (DV)

Waitawheta – Franklin Road (DV)

Dickeys Flat Campground (BCA)

Orokawa Bay (DV)

5.2.3 Rangitaiki AreaWhakatane

Fairbrother Loop track (DV)

Tauwhare Pa (SST)

Whirinaki FP

River Road (DV)

Waiatu (DV)

Arahaki Lagoon (DV)

Sanctuary (DV)

Plateau (BCC)

5.3 Known Physical Impacts


Vandalism, track surface and vegetation

damage due to poor design, no design and high

use at Okere Falls and Wai-o-Tapu mud-pools

(free entry). In the historic context there

are future aspirations to monitor physical

impacts in relation to the power station

remnant at Okere Falls.



21

5.3.2 Tauranga Area

Little track impact except for sites wherewater management is a problem. Environmental

damage (stripped bush for fire wood and holes

being dug) and vandalism at Daly’s clearing.

Some mountain bike impacts such as the Crown

Track. There are some problems with

vandalism. However the level of impact is

reduced as sites are upgraded. The higher the

quality of facility provision the lower the

level of vandalism indicating the there is

greater respect for sites that are up-kept.

In the historic context impacts include

natural erosion of historic features,including tramlines through vegetation

encroachment, visitor related erosion through

foot traffic; and loss of artefacts such as

visitors collecting mining artefacts.


Litter, wet and boggy patches lead to walking

track width being expanded by people walking

around affected site. Some impact from

horses. Historic site impacts include erosion of

fortified earthworks due to visitor impact,

vandalism, litter, weeds and natural erosion.

5.4 Known Social Impacts


Very little from observation e.g.

overcrowding however little comparative

research has been undertaken (see 4.4).

5.4.2 Tauranga Area

Main impacts are a result of a conflict

between recreational users. For example dog

walkers and trampers at Day Visitor sites.This problem can be mitigated with the

enforcement of by-laws such as spot fines.

This is an issue at Crown Track, Orokawa Bay,

Wairongomai and Wairere Falls.

Another conflict is that some tramping clubs,

such as the Waikato Tramping Club, do not

want to see the Kaimai-Mamaku Forest Park

opened up to a wider range of recreational

users. At the same time there are a number of

older recreational users, also trampers, who



22

want to access the Waitawheta Valley but are

unable to due to the number of river

crossings along the track – an access issue.


Possible social issues are the lack of

security of vehicles at road-ends, and

associated transportation problems.

5.5 Numeric Data Knowledge

Gaps


Numeric data collection at Okere Falls is aproblem due to the entrance being three

metres wide. An adequate counting system

needs to be sourced.

There are also gaps in numeric data

collection at other sites due to counters

taking five months to be repaired. Spare

counters need to be held to enable rapid

replacement in the event of equipment

failure.

5.5.2 Tauranga Area

Types of data needed are forest park entry

figures and general trend information. Itwould also be useful to determine visitor

origin in terms of whether they are local,

national or international and specifically

whether they are from Tauranga, Auckland or

Hamilton. It would be useful to find some

method of determining visitor direction, i.e.

which way they are walking on a track.

At present it is not possible to determine

whether huts are reaching capacity, it would

be useful to find this out. A warden in the

new Waitawheta hut at high use times will

enable figures to be collected at thislocation.

It would be useful to have access to the

local council’s data to enable comparison,

particularly at road ends such as Te Aroha.


The two forms of data needed in Rangitaiki

are numeric trends of visitors to the Areas

tracks and the total number of visitors to

the forest park.



23

5.6 Physical Impact

Knowledge Gaps


Fragile sites need to be monitored as little

is known about local recreational impacts.

These sites include Rainbow Mountain, Wai-o-

tapu mud-pool and Twin Streams. Ideally this

would take place via an annual digital photo

baseline comparison study and other physical

measurements (e.g. regeneration of certain

plant species).

5.6.2 Tauranga Area

There are not many sites that have physical

impact problems. It is limited to those

tracks that have erosion problems associated

with track water management. For example Mt

Te Aroha to the old Waitawheta Hut Track.

One type of data that needs improving is

ensuring historic sites have baseline

studies. Completed on physical impacts from

which comparisons can be made.


There are some physical impact knowledge gaps

in Rangitaiki that relate specifically tohistorical sites but also have implications

for other sites. These are damage by

vegetation (root structures etc) and damage

by campers (fires etc).

5.7 Social Impact Knowledge

Gaps


Visitors may be happy with the current level

of visitation. Therefore now is a good time

to carry out a survey to establish a baselinestate from which to establish future

satisfaction monitoring. Due to projected

growth in tourism, overcrowding at sites will

become an issue in the future. Visitor

surveys need to be carried out at campgrounds

and tracks to determine the predominant

visitor group. Facilities can then be

maintained at a suitable standard for this

group.



24

5.7.2 Tauranga Area

It would be useful to carry out a survey todetermine visitor demographics by site. An

example would be the percentage of elderly

trampers using Waitawheta track and the year

on year trend in visitor demographics. This

would enable more informed management

decisions to be taken with regards to river

bridging. It is likely and future studies may

enable this to be shown, that the social

demographic of track users in this location

will change over time. This may be due to the

new Waitawheta Hut and an upgraded link

through to Wairongomai creating a historic

heritage trail.


Useful studies would examine visitor

satisfaction, demographics, visitor activity,

predominant user group and whether visitors

are on their own or with groups.

5.8 Further Research Needs

5.8.1 Economic Impact Studies

An objective of the conservancy Recreation

Strategy (See Appendix 5) is to increase thelevel of indirect economic benefit accruing

to local communities from visitors to the

protected sites of the Bay of Plenty. The

means of doing this is to both increase the

linkages between visitors and the local

community and to work with economic

development and community organisations to

decrease leakage from the local economy.

To enable this objective to be met a baseline

study of local economic impact needs to be

carried out. Comparison studies can then be

undertaken to monitor change. It is likelythat this research will be done by a

contracted agency or students. This method is

considered further in section 6.4.



25

6.0 Visitor Monitoring Methods

Visitor Monitoring can be divided into threeseparate elements; numeric data collection,

physical impact (impacts on the physicalenvironment) and social impact (impacts on

human social conditions at sites) monitoring.This section talks briefly about each of

these and about how they can be applied inthe Bay of Plenty.


(NDC)

In the past NDC has occurred at a number of

sites without any real strategic approach as

to why visitor numbers were being recorded

and what use the information would be put to.

The national approach to NDC is to pick sites

that are representative of the user groups

(as specified in the National Visitor

Strategy) within a Conservancy and to record

and follow trends in use. This approach hasbeen taken in this Visitor Monitoring Plan.

The principle objective of NDC is to provide

information regarding trends of visitor use

over time. This information becomes more

meaningful when used in conjunction, and

analysed with information about the visitor

and their visit.

Management is better informed and able to

make decisions about priority setting and

resource allocations. Visitor monitoring will

provide staff with information for goodstrategic and operational planning. It is

therefore important to gather visitor

information about sites where visitor

information can assist with management

decisions.

Forms of NDC that will be used in the Bay of

Plenty are: track counters, hut books,

campsite data, visitor centre door counters

and road traffic counters. The majority of

data will come from track counters.



26

Hut Wardens provide useful information on the

number of total bed nights by season and by

hut. In some cases this has been gathered

over a number of years. Collection of this

data should continue as part of the overall

visitor NDC.

Track Counters

There has recently been a change signalled

from the department’s Research, Development

and Information (RD&I) Unit. Collection of

information from sources other than the new

data compatible step counter is now

acceptable. It is proposed the foundation of

the conservancy’s visitor numeric data

collection shall rely on the use of simple

tally counters, built into a small boardwalk

system. These shall be installed at strategic

locations (see Section 9.1, and read at

regular intervals, e.g. the first week of

each month.

These counters are cheap, reliable and

accurate. Alternative counters such as the

data compatible step counter and counter pads

are expensive, complicated to use andcurrently unreliable, particularly in the

sulphurous and wet conditions of the Bay of

Plenty.

However national standards will be adhered to

and as and when data-compatible step counters

become widely used and reliable then the

tally-counters will be replaced with the

latest design of counters.

Testing and Calibration

In order for data to be meaningful, countersneed to be calibrated. A calibrated track

counter will accurately record the number of

times it is triggered.

A test takes place to ensure that the track

counter is working correctly. This is carried

out by setting the track counter in place and

taking its current reading or alternatively

resetting the track counter at zero. The

track counter is then activated a number of

times (20-30). The reading is then checked to

see what percentage of crossings has



27

triggered the track counter. Depending on

location the counter will need to be tested

for the different users expected at the site.

As an example for an induction loop it will

need to be checked if it measures bicycles,

cars, buses, campervans, motorbikes etc.

Once tested, the counter needs to be

calibrated. This exercise will record:

the number of vehicles and type

the number of passengers in each vehicle

the amount of non vehicular traffic

traffic not related to recreational visits

(e.g. staff, contractors)

If, during the course of the year, there is a

different use period identified and the

number of passengers in each vehicle type is

likely to be different, additional

observations should be undertaken. Weekend

use may be different to mid-week use

therefore observations should take place on

both.

Calibration converts the counter reading to

give a weighted number of people crossing the

counter. For example, observation show the

average number of people in a vehicle is 3.5

persons, the counter shows 50 vehicles were

recorded, therefore the total number of

visitors equals 3.5 X 50 = 175 visitors.



28

6.2 Physical Impact

Monitoring

Staff must assess sites on a case-by-case

basis, as it is possible that management

intervention can circumvent the need to

establish a long term monitoring programme.

Means of assessment will be determined by

areas in conjunction with the conservancy’s

Technical Support Team and advice from the

forthcoming RD&I Visitor Monitoring Toolkit.

Sites can be artificially ‘hardened’ to

mitigate or reduce physical impacts at places

where visitor use is judged to have adverse

effects and appropriate visitor information,

i.e. care codes, can influence visitor

behaviour. Through effective impact

monitoring sites can be prioritised for work

and adverse impacts managed accordingly.

New visitor sites provide an opportunity to

gather baseline data and establish monitoring

programmes. These enable management to

intervene at an early stage should impact

trends become unacceptable. For this reason

monitoring of new sites will be a priority

for monitoring physical impacts.

Wherever possible, it is highly recommended

that base information is collected before a

site starts to deteriorate. Ideally in most

sites, fieldwork should be conducted mid to

late season when visitor use is most likely

to have had an impact as sites are being used

extensively. Site assessment should be

undertaken at the same time of year.

Assessing the site a few weeks either side of

the original date is acceptable. This isnecessary to avoid factors such as

Physiological changes in vegetation growth

and differences in site use during the year.

Many studies have been carried out relating

to the physical impacts of tourism on

protected areas (Ward et al; Booth and

Cullen; McQueen). Some link physical/social

impacts and visitor numbers; or correlate

erosion with level of use (McQueen 1991). The

results of these and future studies will be

considered during the preparation of physical



29

impact monitoring programmes in the

Conservancy. Of note is the Geothermal

Impacts Study (Ward et al, 2000) in Rotorua,

which carried out research at peak season

enabling a worst case scenario to be formed.

The goals of the conservancy biodiversity

monitoring team will also be considered

during programme preparation.


Social impact monitoring assesses visitor

perceptions, expectations and levels ofsatisfaction. It is generally applicable to

sites that have intense use and where social

interaction is high. Conflict can occur

between individuals, between individuals and

groups and between and within groups.

Visitors can be affected by overcrowding of a

site, loss of solitude, noise and changes to

facilities leading to a reduction in the

quality of the recreational experience.

Some social issues can be resolved through

management intervention rather than

monitoring. An example could be providingvisitors with information about likely hut

usage in peak holiday periods, so they have

the information to choose where and when they

will visit.

Another perceived impact occurring is

associated with the disturbance of natural

quiet and perceptions of crowding at sites

being managed for their natural values and

experiences. This research is largely

proactive, driven by what the Department

thinks visitors should (or should not)

experience and is seldom a response toprevailing adverse social conditions.

Practically all social impact research is

associated with perceptions of overcrowding

of high-use huts and tracks.

Some social impact monitoring will need to be

repeated to monitor and compare effects and

change over time. The overseas norm for

repeating the process is ten years although





31

or national economy. When the wealth of an

area under study, be that New Zealand, the

Bay of Plenty or an area or town within the

Bay of Plenty increases, this is the economic

benefit. Although benefits can also be

perceived as non-market values, they are most

often assessed in financial terms.

When the conservancy spends money (from the

government) in one area of the Bay of Plenty

there may be an economic benefit to the local

economy as the funds have come from outside

the region and are an increase in wealth.

This is a local benefit but not a national

benefit as this is just a redistribution of

resources around the country. If the

protected area can attract foreign investment

or funding then this represents a local and

national benefit.

This can also be considered in terms of

visitors. Foreign visitors to a protected

area are spending foreign capital. This

represents both an impact and a benefit to

the local and national economy. A local

visitor, although equally welcome represents

a redistribution of capital, i.e. an impact

but not an economic benefit.

Studies of local economic benefit would

consider the number of local (domestic) and

foreign (international) visitors to a

protected area, how much they are spending

(and on what), how long they are staying and

where they are staying. There are also issues

of leakage to consider. i.e. whether the

recipient of the spending is going to remove

the majority of the money from the local

economy (e.g. a hotel chain) or retain it

within the local economy (a locally owned

motel).

6.5 Indicators

Indicators are used to measure physical and

social impacts. The selection of indicators

is a key stage in planning a monitoring

project. The success or failure of the

project depends on the selection of correct

indicators. To ensure correct indicators are

chosen they must be determined in conjunction

with specialists, who as well as being



32

experienced, have access to research that can

help inform the choice.

Indicators must be selected according to the

problem, aiming at the best compromise

between a clear, early answer to the initial

question and taking account of costs and

feasibility. Indicators have desirable

characteristics such as being specific and

being measurable. Indicators can also be

qualitative. For example, social indicators

are analysed in regard to quality, but then

they are generally assigned numbers to

establish rankings such as xx number of

people thought this or xx percentage of the

group thought that.

Key Indicator Characteristics

Measurable Indicators should be

quantitative i.e. able to be measured.

Reliable Indicators should be capable of

being measured precisely and accurately

(repeatable measures by different people).

Reliable indicators allow ongoing measurement

of real change, rather than a change in the

way something is measured.

Cost-effective Indicators should be

capable of being measured cost effectively by

field personnel using simple equipment and

techniques.

Significant Indicators must relate to

significant conditions or features. A good

indicator should be capable of detecting

changes that could become serious problems if

left. Examples include changes that persist

for a long time, disrupt ecosystem

functioning or reduce the quality of

recreational experience.

Relevant The types of change that would

be detected through monitoring of indicators

should be confined to changes that result

from human activities. This characteristic

may not apply to places where the objectives

stress minimal human impact only.

Sensitive Indicators should focus on

sensitive components that provide an early

warning system, alerting managers to



33

deteriorating conditions while there is still

time to correct things.

Efficient Indicators are most

efficient if they reflect the condition of

more than themselves, because this reduces

the number of parameters that must be

monitored.

Responsive The types and causes of change

that are detected through the monitoring of

indicators should be responsive to management

control.

Selection of Correct Indicators

A comparison between desired characteristics

of indicators and indicators themselves show

three types of problems have been evident.

These are a failure to:

Define indicators in specific and

quantitative terms. For instance it may not

be possible to categorically assert fish and

wildlife conditions as they are variable, but

it is essential to be as definitive and clear

as possible.

Select correct indicators because of lack of

understanding about which are the most

significant e.g. in monitoring water quality

a number of indicators are available such as

temperature, coliform presence or turbidity

but the problem can be in determining the

most significant indicator.

Select correct indicators due to the lack of

established and reliable monitoring methods,

particularly in social impact monitoring.





35

7.0 Visitor Monitoring Management

7.1 Monitoring Roles

Although department staff will have the most

involvement with the visitor monitoring

programme and collect the majority of the

data, other groups may be involved. These

include students, volunteers, conservation

organisations and contracted research

agencies. The success of a visitor monitoringprogramme will also depend on the support of

senior mangers, as well as dedicated staff

that are accurate and consistent at recording

information.

The key to the programme is that it produces

standardised and robust information. There is

little point in establishing a sophisticated

system that fails 50% of the time and does

not provide the data required to make useful

management decisions. Data collection,

recording and analysis should be kept simple.

Consistency with the programme sustained overa period of time will provide the data

required to show trends and allow useful

management decisions.

Rangers, Programme Managers, Recreation

Planners and key conservancy staff such as

Community Awareness and Concessions Officers

are integral to the success of the visitor

monitoring programme.

7.1.1 Rangers responsible for collecting

the information from the field will need to

have:

Good communication with their Programme

Manager.

Support and co-operation from the Programme

Manager for the implementation of the

monitoring programme and also the running,

maintenance and provision of feedback on

results.

No bias in influencing information.

Support the rationale behind visitor

monitoring.



36

7.1.2 Programme Managers responsible for

the implementation of the visitor monitoring

programme in their Area will need to have:

Good communication skills with Ranger staff

and Conservancy Recreation Planner.

Support the rational behind visitor

monitoring.


Provide support and co-operation to Ranger

staff for both the implementation of the

monitoring programme but also running,

maintenance and provision of feedback on

results.

7.1.3 Recreation Planners responsible forthe implementation and coordination of the

visitor monitoring programme in the

Conservancy will need to have:

Good communication skills with Area Programme

Managers and Senior Management.


monitoring.


Provide support and co-operation to the

Programme Manager.

Ensure Access programme knowledge is up to

date.

7.1.4 Key Conservancy Staff responsiblefor providing advice on monitoring and

information needs and liaising with

concessionaires.

Good communication skills with community

organisations and concessionaires.


monitoring.


Provide support and co-operation to the

Recreation Planner.

Position Role Tasks

Ranger Gather

visitor

monitoring

numeric

data and

maintain

equipment.

During the

first week of each

month gather

visitor monitoring

numeric data

Maintain

counters by

spraying monthly



37

with rust

inhibitors and

insect spray

Undertake

calibration of

counters

Enter data

Programme

Manager

Ensure the

effective

operation

of the

visitor

monitoring

within

theirrespective

Area

Allocate

sufficient staff

resources for the

effective running

of the visitor

monitoring work

plan

Recreation

Planner

Provide

advice on

visitor

monitoring

Co-ordinate

visitor monitoring

throughout the

conservancy

Database

administration

Produce Annual

Visitor Trends

Report.

Review VisitorMonitoring Plan.

Key

Conservancy

Staff

Provide

advice on

visitor

monitoring

Assess

monitoring needs

for visitor

information and

concessions and

advise Recreation

Planner.

7.1.4 Students

Students will be encouraged to get involved

with research topics. There may be future

opportunities for funding of research

projects relevant to the conservancy. A list

of potential research topics is provided in

Appendix 4.

7.1.5 Volunteers

It is envisaged that the role of volunteers

for will be developed in data collection. An

example may be where volunteers are assigned



38

a counter and asked to collect data on a

monthly basis.

7.1.6 Contracted Agencies

Future involvement of national and

international agencies involved with

protected area research will be encouraged.

Examples are Earthwatch, and Raleigh

International.

Some work may be contracted to consultants

where the scope of the research is beyond the

skill or time constraints of department

staff. Examples are demographic/visitor

satisfaction surveys and economic benefitstudies.

7.2 Adaptive Management

Staff should take an adaptive approach to

monitoring their work. This means they must

be open-minded and prepared to shift focus or

change direction if the conclusion of a

review of the programme shows this to be

necessary.

For example, a monitoring programme would be

established with agreed indicators. A

timeline would be established that nominated

key milestones where the programme would be

evaluated. Staff would analyse results at

the agreed dates and if necessary modify

indicators or even change course.

If analysis showed that indicators being used

to measure impacts were incorrect then it is

important to stop, adapt and start again.

Putting work on hold can be frustrating, but

there would still be information gains from

the work done to date.





40

Determine which sites/tracks are receiving

high or low use.

To examine issues of capacity in huts along

the ‘Whirinaki Circuit’.

8.2 Physical Impact

Monitoring


The main sites in the Rotorua Lakes Area that

require physical monitoring are Twin Streams,

Hot pools and Wai-o-tapu mud-pool. These are

fragile geothermal sites that need a baselinestate established and periodic (annual) photo

monitoring. Results from the Lincoln

University Study (Ward et al, 2000) should be

considered in relation to any study carried

out. In addition the conclusions of this

study can be applied to other geothermal

sites suffering from visitor impacts such as

trampling.

Future physical impact monitoring required at

the Okere Falls Power Station remnant.

Physical impact monitoring at other sites is

not seen as a priority due to the nature and

location of these assets.

8.2.2 Tauranga Area

EIA for tracks for which an upgrade is

proposed such as the Cashmores Clearing

Tracks.

Waitawheta Valley tramline – combine NDC with

a study of visitor satisfaction and physical

impacts.

Vandalism at Wairongomai

Environmental impacts at Daly’s Clearing

Road end vandalism

All historic sites should have a baseline

survey, key historic sites that are

considered to be at risk, such as Wairongomai

and Waitawheta, will be monitored.


Photographic monitoring will continue to be

collected before and after mountain biking

events to determine environmental impact.

Some historic sites will be monitored where

these sites are at risk.



41

Visitors to Moutohara Island will continue to

be checked to ensure pests are not introduced

onto the island.



Predominant user surveys at campgrounds to

establish what is needed at what location.

Concessionaire surveys to establish visitor

satisfaction.

8.3.2 Tauranga Area

A demographic survey to determine both thepredominant user group and the age ratio of

trampers. This is necessary to establish

whether users are being catered for.

A facility user’s survey to determine what

visitors to Dickeys Flat Campsite require.

Any concessionaire data in relation to

visitor profiles or satisfaction.

Survey of visitor intentions at Wharawhara Rd

Survey of track linkages used and required,

East-West and North-South through the Park.

8.3.3 Rangitaiki Area Demographic Strata survey, hut book analysis,

activity survey, short term contract rotated

between Areas.

8.4 Prioritisation

Numeric data collection through track

counters, road counters and visitor centre

door counters will be collected and entered

into the database monthly.

It is likely that the ideal timing forphysical impact monitoring will be during

autumn time to allow impacts from the

recreational season to become apparent. Data

should be collected annually.

The ideal timing for social impact monitoring

will be during the summer months to allow the

largest sample possible. Data should be

collected annually in the short term.

No one form of data collection is of a higher

priority than another. The issue is one of



42

timing and requests on staff resources. All

three, numeric physical and social, are a

priority.


Social impact surveys will ideally take place

every 2-3 years. This is dependent on

budgetary constraints.

8.4.2 Tauranga Area

Existing sites first and then others.


The first priority is to get counters on the

ground. Following that the priority sites formonitoring are the WEMZ sites and Fairbrother

loop walk.

8.5 Additional Research

Data from the conservancy visitor monitoring

will be available both on the department

website and in hard copy format. Secondary

research will be welcomed from outside

agencies providing this secondary research is

also made available to the department.

Research that concessionaires carry out into

their visitors will be collected by the

department and held as part of a library of

visitor data.

Research programmes will be welcomed and

encouraged. Research can provide new

knowledge, insight and procedures for visitor

management. Research can frequently reveal

trends and patterns that are valuable for

planning and management.

Potential researchers, for example students,will be encouraged and supported with an

inventory of potential research topics

(including title, description of topic,

contact name, possible research sites and

information on funding). There may, in some

cases, be opportunities for practical help

with research. (See Appendix 4).



43

9.0 Monitoring Sites9.1 Numeric Data Collection

Sites (Existing and New)


Short Walk (SST

sites) Counters

Visitor

Category

Asse

t #

Site

#

Counter

ID

Rotomahana

Isthmus track SST 9644

0 40009

4 RLAO/T1

Tarawera Falls

Walk

SST 9644

4

40008

8

RLAO/T2

Okere Falls

Walk

SST 9652

3

40008

2

RLAO/T3

Rainbow

Mountain -

Steaming Cliffs

walk (Carpark

to viewpoint)

SST 9904

0

40025

8

RLAO/T4

Walking Track (DV sites) Counters

Te Auheke track DV 9642

8 40010

0 RLAO/T5

Eastern

Okaitaina

Walkway

DV 9644

1

40009

1

RLAO/T6

Tarawera Falls

to Lake

Tarawera track

DV 9644

3

40008

9

RLAO/T7

Tarawhai

(Nature

Interpretation)

Track

DV 9663

6 40007

8

RLAO/T8

Ngahopua Track DV 96637

400075

RLAO/T9

Hinehopu

(Hongi’s) Track DV 9663

8 40007

3

RLAO/T1

0

Kaharoa Track DV 9903

5 40025

7 RLAO/T1

1

Tramping Track (BCC sites)

Counters

Mangorewa Track BCC 96410 400083 RLAO/T12

Northern BCC 96442 400093 RLAO/T13



44

Tarawera track

W.Okataina

W/Way – Educ

Centre to

Ngapuka Bay

BCC 96641 400091 RLAO/T14

Rainbow Mtn –

Summit to

Steaming Cliffs

viewpoint jcn

track

BCC 96645 400065 RLAO/T15

Mokaihaha track BCC 96646 400063 RLAO/T16

W.Okataina

w/way – Educ

Centre to

WhakapoungakauTrig

BCC 96652 400068 RLAO/T17

Amenity Sites and Campgrounds

Counter form would be pad systems and laser

vehicle counters where appropriate, also random

sampling undertaken by individuals to gain snap

shots during peak times. For campgrounds, the

visitor survey sheets completed by wardens

would suffice.

Punaromia/Orcha

rd Picnic Area

10035

7400066 RLAO/C1

Okataina

Roadend AmenityArea

10035

4

400092 RLAO/C2

Lake Tarawera

Outlet Campsite

10001

5

400093 RLAO/C3

Hot Water Beach

Campsite, Lake

Tarawera

100013

400095 RLAO/C4

Rerewhakaaitu

campsite (Ash

Pit Road)

100016

400096 RLAO/C5

Rerewhakaaitu

campsite (Brett

Road)

100017

400097 RLAO/C6

Humphreys Bay

Picnic Area

100352

400103 RLAO/C7

Car Parks and Traffic Counters

Heat sensitive laser counters would form the

basis for this type of numeric data collection.

Adapt to new technologies as they become

available.

Okere Falls Car

Park

100356 400081 RLAO/R1

Hamurana 34614 400259 RLAO/R2



45

Springs Car

Park

9.1.2 Tauranga Area

KMFP Entry Point Track Counters

Karangahake

Gorge

DV 96433 400108 TAO/T1

Dickeys Flat BCA 96430 400111 TAO/T2

Franklin Road

Counter

Road TAO/T3

Waitawheta

Track (Franklin

Rd to Bluff Stm

Jcn)

DV 97785 400206 TAO/T4

Lindemans Rd DV 96453 400127 TAO/T5

Woodlands Road

Counter

Road TAO/R1

Woodlands Rd

(Waitengaue Stm

Track)

BCA 96463 400116 TAO/T6

Tui Mine to Te

Aroha Track

BCA 96419 400158 TAO/T7

Te Aroha Track BCA 96461 400118 TAO/T8

Wairongomai –

Piako Tramway –

Low-level DriveTrack

DV 96448 400189 TAO/T9

Wairongomai –

Kauri Grove

Track

BCA 96424 400162 TAO/T10

Wairakau Rd

(Waipapu

Stream)

Non DoC Land TAO/T11

Wairere Track

(Wairere Falls

to Clay Road)

BCA 96403 400141 TAO/T12

Wharawhara Link

Track

DV 97786 400208 TAO/T13

Tuahu Track

(East/Tuahu

Kauri Track)

DV 96407 400136 TAO/T14

Mt Eliza Mine –

Thompsons Track

BCA 96421 400166 TAO/T15

Uplands Rd

Counter

DV 96520 400202 TAO/R2

Aongotete to

Uplands Rd

Track

DV 96520 400167 TAO/T16

Swimming Hole

Track,

DV 96409 400168 TAO/T17



46

Aongotete

Te Tuhi Track DV 96391 400145 TAO/T18Whakamarama Rd

Counter

DV 98444 400213 TAO/T19

Ngamuwahine Rd

Picnic Area

DV 96395 400152 TAO/T20

Kaimai Road –

Hendersons

Tramline (Nth

Branch Track)

BCA 97787 400209 TAO/T21

Kaimai Road –

Hendersons

Tramline (Wstn

Branch Track)

DV 96397 400148 TAO/T22

Kaimai Summit

Loop Track

BCA 97790 400150 TAO/T23

Rapurapu Kauri

Track

BCA 96396 400151 TAO/T24

Youth Lodge to

Te Rereioturu

Falls Track

DV 96412 400185 TAO/T25

Te Rereioturu

Falls Track,

Ngatuhoa

DV 96473 400187 TAO/T26

Woods Mill to

Waiomou Stm Tk

BCA 97789 400211 TAO/T27

Track Counters – Other

Waitawheta

Pipeline Walk

(Crown stope to

Dickeys Flat)

DV 99005 400214 TAO/T28

Dubbo 96 Track DV 97784 400205 TAO/T29

Daly’s Clearing

Track

BCA 96455 400112 TAO/T30

Waitawheta

Track (Bluff

Stm Jcn to

Waitawheta Hut)

BCA 96438 400114 TAO/T31

Bluff Stream

Kauri Grove

(Waitawheta)

Track

BCA 96436 400113 TAO/T32

Orokawa Bay

Track

DV 96435 400104 TAO/T33

Orokawa-Homunga

Bay

Track/Access

Track

DV 96434 400106 TAO/T34

Kaituna Wetland DV 97780 400204 TAO/T35





48

Taupiri Lookout

Walk

DV 96619 400047 RAO/T9

Whirinaki

Recreation Camp

to Whirinaki

River Track

DV 96621 400044 RAO/T10

Whirinaki

Recreation Camp

Lookout and

Wiremu Merito

Reserve Track

DV 96620 400045 RAO/T11

Tauwhare Pa

Historic

Site/Walk

SST 96617 400050 RAO/T12

Whakatane

Nga Tapu Wae O

Toi W/way –

Fairbrother

Loop Section

DV 96642 400051 RAO/T13

Nga Tapu Wae O

Toi W/way –

Burma Rd to top

of Fairbrother

Loop

DV 96644 400052 RAO/T14

Nga Tapu Wae O

Toi W/wayMelville

Section

DV 96625 400053 RAO/T15

Matata SR Track DV 96647 400057 RAO/T16

Rangitaiki

River Walk

BCA 96687 400001 RAO/T17

Waipunga Forest Park

Matakuhia Track BCA 96626 400033 RAO/T18

Opureke Track BCA 96624 400037 RAO/T19

Road Counters

Plateau Roadend 98457 400042 RAO/R1

Okahu Roadend 98476 400032 RAO/R2

River Road 98475 400009 RAO/R3

Pukahunui

Roadend

192838 400325 RAO/R4

Matakuhia Road

end

192839 400033 RAO/R5

Hut Books



49

Mid Okahu Hut 32286 400031 RAO/HB1

Central

Whirinaki

32521 400013 RAO/HB2

Mangamate 32700 400017 RAO/HB3

Upper Whirinaki 32769 400015 RAO/HB4

Upper Te Hoe 32568 400022 RAO/HB5

Central Te Hoe 32570 400024 RAO/HB6

Mangakahika 32677 400025 RAO/HB7

Rogers (Te

Wairoa)

32668 400028 RAO/HB8

Whangatawhia

(Skips)

32214 400029 RAO/HB9

Moerangi 32674 400027 RAO/HB10

Upper Matakuhia 34249 400033 RAO/HB11

Lower Matakuhia 34250 400036 RAO/HB12

Intention Books

Plateau to Mid

Whirinaki Track

96675 400020 RAO/IB1

Okahu Roadend 96627 400029 RAO/IB2

Oruiwaka

Ecological Area

Track

96684 400010 RAO/IB3

Matakuhia 96626 400033 RAO/IB4

Rangitaiki Visitor Centre

Visitor Centre door counter data has been

collected daily for over 15 years. This

provides excellent trend information and will

continue to be collected.

9.2 Physical Impact

Monitoring Sites


Photo Monitoring

Sites

BaselineDate/Fre

quency

Asset# Site#

Twin Streams

– Wai-o-tapu Dec

04/Annua

l

NA 40006

4

RLAO/P1

Mud pool –

Wai-o-tapu Dec

04/Annua

l

10036

0 40006

4 RLAO/P2

Tarawera

Falls Walk

Dec

04/Annua

l

96444 40008

8

RLAO/P3



50

Te Koutu Pa

Site

Dec

04/Annua

l

NA 40026

1

RLAO/P4

Okere Falls

Walk Dec

04/Annua

l

96523 40008

2 RLAO/P5

Punaromia/Or

chard Picnic

Area

Dec

04/Annua

l

10035

7 40006

6 RLAO/P6

Hot Water

Beach Dec

04/Annua

l

10001

3 40009

5 RLAO/P7

Rerewhakaait

u – Freedom

campingzone. This

consists of

the lake

edge

vicinity

between the

council

campground

and Brett Rd

campground.

Dec

04/Annua

l

NA NA RLAO/P8

Hamurana Dec

04/Annua

l

40025

9

RLAO/P9

Wairoa –

Lake

Tarawera

Dec

04/Annua

l

NA NA RLAO/P10

Rainbow

Mountain –

Steaming

Cliffs

viewpoint

Dec

04/Annua

l

99040 40006

5

RLAO/P11

Puketapu

Point at

Whangaikorea

Dec

04/Annua

l

NA 40007

7

RLAO/P12

Powerstation

remnant at

Okere Falls

Dec04/Annua

l

50034 400082

RLAO/P13

9.2.2 Tauranga Area

SurveyLocation

BaselineDate/Fre

quency

Asset#

Site#

Cashmores Dec 96447 40012 TAO/P1



51

Clearing

(EIA for

tracks for

which an

upgrade is

proposed)

04/Annua

l

96449

96456

3

40013

1

40012

4

Waitawheta

Valley

Tramline

(Combine NDC

with a study

of physical

impacts,

including

historic)

Dec

04/Annua

l

96438 40011

4

TAO/P2

Wairongomai

(Vandalism

study and

historic

physical

impacts

study)

Dec

04/Annua

l

96459 40012

1

TAO/P3

Daly’s

Clearing

(Environment

al impact

study)

Dec

04/Annua

l

96455 40011

2

TAO/P4


Photo MonitoringSites

BaselineDate/Frequency

Asset#

Site#

Plateau Rd

to Mid

Whirinaki

Track

Photographic

monitoring

will

continue to

be collected

after

mountain

biking

events to

determine

environmenta

l impact.

Dec

04/Biann

ual

96675 40002

0

RAO/P1



52

Historic

Sites

Baseline

Date/Frequency

Asset

#

Site

#

Rogers Hut Dec

04/Annua

l

32668 40002

8

RAO/P2

Tokitoki

Historic

Reserve

Dec

04/Annua

l

N/A 40006

1

RAO/P3

Tauwhare Pa

Historic

Site

Dec

04/Annua

l

N/A 40005

0

RAO/P4

Ohope Scenic

Reserve

Dec

04/Annua

l

N/A 40004

8

RAO/P5

Fort Galatea

Historic

Reserve

Dec

04/Annua

l

33114 40032

6

RAO/P6

Helicopter

landings in

WFP

Investigate the introduction of

landing permits for Whirinaki FP

and monitor visitor numbers -

need data for number of flights

coming into Whirinaki from

helicopter operations.


Sites


Campsite UserSurvey location

SurveyDate

Asset#

Site #

Punaromia/Orchard

Picnic Area Dec 04

–Jan

05

100357 400066 RLAO/S1

Okataina Road end Dec 04

–Jan

05

100354 400092 RLAO/S2

Lake TaraweraOutlet Campsite

Dec 04–Jan

05

100015 400093 RLAO/S3

Hot Water Beach

Campsite, Lake

Tarawera

Dec 04

–Jan

05

100013 400095 RLAO/S4

Rerewhakaaitu

campsite (Ash Pit

Road)

Dec 04

–Jan

05

100016 400096 RLAO/S5

Rerewhakaaitu

campsite (Brett

Road)

Dec 04

–Jan

05

100017 400097 RLAO/S6



53

Humphreys Bay

Picnic Area

Dec 04

–Jan

05

100352 400103 RLAO/S7

9.3.2 Tauranga Area

A demographic survey will be carried out to

determine both the predominant user group and

the age ratio of trampers. This is necessary

to determine whether users are being catered

for.

SurveyLocation

SurveyDate

Asset#

Site #

Waitawheta

Track UserSurvey

Dec 04

–Jan 05

96438 400114 TAO/S1

Dickeys Flat

Campsite User

Survey

Dec 04

–Jan 05

100018 400153 TAO/S2

Wharawhara Rd

Intentions

Survey

Dec 04

–Jan 05

97786 400213 TAO/S3

Wairere Falls Dec 04-

Jan 05

96402 400153 TAO/S4


Forms of social impact monitoring willinclude demographic surveys, visitor

satisfaction surveys, hut book analysis,

activity survey. Monitoring will be carried

out via short term contracts rotated between

Areas.

Survey

Location

Survey

Date

Asset

#

Site #

Oruiwaka

Ecological

Area

Dec 04

–Jan 05

96684 400010 RAO/S1

Waiatu Falls Dec 04

–Jan 05

96622 400039 RAO/S2

Arahaki Lagoon Dec 04

–Jan 05

96683 400011 RAO/S3

Nga Tapu Wae O

Toi W/way

Melville

Section

Dec 04

–Jan 05

96625 400052 RAO/S4

Nga Tapu Wae O

Toi W/way -

Burma Rd to

top of

Fairbrother

Dec 04

–Jan 05

96644 400053 RAO/S5



54

Loop

9.4 Concessionaire Data

All future concessions include the

requirement that annual activity returns are

made to the department. Existing

concessionaires will need to file activity

returns from when they renew their agreement.

This information will be used to monitor

visitor use of concessionaires.



55

10.0 Data Analysis10.1 Data Analysis Method

The visitor monitoring data will be stored on

an Access system that will be based on that

used by Southland Conservancy. It will have a

standard template for recording counter

readings at the end of every month; hut book

information and campsite data.

10.2 Data Analysis Process

Data collected by Rangers

Data entered by Rangers into A ccess V isitorInformation Database ( AVID)

When data has been entered, hard copies of

data entry sheet to be forwarded to

Recreation Planner for filing.

AVID data interpreted by Recreation Planner

and used to examine visitor numbers and

trends. It will also be used to produce anannual Visitor Trends Report and for use in

management plans.

10.3 Database Content

The AVID database will hold the following

information:

Visitor monitoring sitesSite Name, site function, site group, parent

group, area, VAMS site/asset; status, grid

reference; site counter factor, factor

explanation

Counter data (track, road, visitor centre)Monthly counter reading, monthly calibration

readings/tests, monthly counter comment

Counter location and use

Counter type, serial number, location,

counter status, purchase date, install date

and remove date and comments

Hut books and hut tickets collected





57

10.4 Outputs

Production of Bay of Plenty Visitor Trendsannual report

Visitor Trends will contain estimates (based

on the visitor monitoring programme) of the

number of day visits, overnight visits and

bed nights for:

Whirinaki and Kaimai-Mamaku Forest Parks

Key locations and activities

Management plans, business plans and future

Conservation Management Strategies mustinclude visitor monitoring information.

Information from the visitor monitoring

programme and the Visitor Trends report will

be publicly available on the Bay of Plenty

page of the DOC website www.doc.govt.nz

The User Manual for the database can be found

at bopco-30941.





59

Road Counters (5) $tba

Opex (hours)

2 days per month/24 days per year, 192 hours,

approx 5K$

10k$ for survey


Capex (equipment)

Track counters (39) $3000

Road Counters (2) $tba

Opex (hours)

3 days per month = 36 days per year = 288

hours, approx 6K$

11.2.4 Conservancy Budget

Capex

None

Opex

8 hours per month for reports 96

80 hours for review 80

176 = 3.5K$ p.a.

11.2.4 Total Budget

Capex: During 2004 the Conservancy will

require $11.500 of unbudgeted capex to set up

the visitor monitoring system. In future

years this figure will drop significantly toaround $3.000 a year for equipment repair and

replacement. Capital projects will be set up

for each Area to cover the costs associated

with counter production.

Opex Each Area will require around

$6.000 of opex per annum and the Conservancy

around $3.500 per annum. This is a total of

$21.500 unbudgeted opex during the 2004/05

financial year. Establishing an effective

visitor monitoring system, including baseline

studies, is an urgent necessity given the

imminent increase in the recreation funding.

Visitor satisfaction monitoring during 2004/5

will be financed from Conservancy salary

budgets, this will be reviewed for 2005/6.

From 2005/6 $10.000 will be set aside p.a for

visitor surveys from Conservancy Operating,

prior to Area allocation.

Table 1 Conservancy Visitor Monitoring Budget 2004-2009

Area RLAO TAO RAO Conservancy

Total (inc



60

Year RP)

Capex

Opex Capex

Opex Capex

Opex Capex

Opex

2004

/05

2.5 6 5 6 3 6 11.5 18

2005

/06

1 6 1 6 1 6 3 21.5

2006/07

1 6 1 6 1 6 3 21.5

2007/08

1 6 1 6 1 6 3 21.5

2008

/09

1 6 1 6 1 6 3 21.5



61

12.0 Monitoring SystemReview

Review the system annually. The process does

not need to be reviewed from the start.

Consider:

Is the system doing what it is designed to

do?

Are people using the information?

Do staff members (both Area and conservancy)

need different information from that which

they needed before?

Some small improvements may be identified,

which should be implemented.

The information on the master file of the

AVID system should be relevant even 10 years

after it was collected. Recreation Planners

must arrange and update a filing system

(computer and manual).

An issue with visitor monitoring programmes

is that the system is never documented and

when system coordinators change the knowledgeis lost. Historic visitor monitoring

information should be catalogued and archived

in both computer and hardcopy formats.



62

Appendix 1: Maintenance ofResources

The Conservation Act, Part II Section 6 (e)

requires the department “to the extent that

the use of any natural or historic resource

for recreation or tourism is not inconsistent

with its conservation, to foster the use of

natural and historic resources for recreation

and to allow their use for tourism”. Section

2 of the Act defines protection, in relation

to a resource, as meaning its ‘maintenance,

as far as practicable, in its current state

but includes (a) its restoration to some

former state and (b) its augmentation,

enhancement or expansion’. As well, Section

2 defines ‘ preservation, in relation to a

resource, as meaning ‘the maintenance, so far

as it practicable, of its intrinsic values’.

Conservation value is directly related to our

understanding of the significance of objects,

species, associations and opportunities.

Social value is a perspective that

encompasses expectations, perceptions andvalues and incorporates the human response to

rarity, uniqueness and distinctiveness of

things natural, cultural and historic.

Intervention and monitoring are two actions

that managers can take when adverse effects

have been noticed or when potential impacts

have been identified. Best practice is to

take action before problems occur. At sites

where visitor opportunities already exist

change will have occurred to a greater or

lesser degree. How much change is acceptable

is a key question to be asked when managingvisitor sites.

Staff must always remember:

That maintaining a site in sound condition isa primary goal of site management

That carrying capacity (the numbers ofvisitors to a site) must be maintained at an

appropriate level to sustain the balance between protection and use.





64

1.1.4 Historic/Cultural Structures and

SitesHistorical and cultural sites comprise key

places and/or structures and important

associated social activities such as

traditional food gathering or fishing. Values

pertain to European and Mäori settlements and

associations and as a result, contain a range

of different perspectives that must be

considered.

1.2 Recreational Resources

A basic element of visitor recreational

experience is to interact with the natural

environment and the department encourages

recreational use by establishing

opportunities for recreation and appreciation

within natural and historical/cultural

settings.

People arrive at sites with a range of

different expectations, perceptions and

values. Assessing social values is a complex

and difficult task as social values are

entirely personal, gained from diverse

individual backgrounds. An individual’s viewof resources and their intrinsic values

differs from person to person so while the

Department can raise awareness and

appreciation of conservation by providing

opportunities and facilities it has limited

influence over individual perceptions.

1.3 Cultural Resources

Cultural resources specific to Mäori are

present in most visitor-related work the

Conservancy undertakes. Monitoring projects

must determine whether cultural elements arepresent at the site. Staff must take account

of this when planning their projects.

Appendix 2 Visitor Strategy

2.1 Visitor Impacts on

Natural and Historic Values

Visitors are attracted to department managed

locations by the relatively unspoilt,



65

unpolluted and uncrowded environment,

impressive natural scenery and accessible

outdoor recreation opportunities. Visitors,

however, can have a variety of detrimental

impacts on the intrinsic natural and historic

values of these places. Impacts include:

Vegetation Clearance, trampling or

destruction

Tracks becoming muddy or widened

Soil erosion and /or soil compaction

Wildlife disturbance or habitat destruction

Changes in wildlife behaviour

Water pollution and pollution of waterways

Toilet waste and rubbish

Noise and visual pollution

Firewood collection, campfires and the

associated increased fire risk

Increased risk of introducing unwanted

species such as weeds

Increased litter, vandalism and souveniring

at historic sites

Disturbance to wahi tapu and archaeological

sites

In 1995, the New Zealand Conservation Boards

identified over 60 sites where visitor

activities were having a detrimental impact

on departmental land. In particular, it was

found that:

Track deterioration and erosion is common.

Vegetation close to some campsites is being

cleared for firewood.

Water supply contamination by human waste is

a problem at some huts, campsites and

roadside areas.

Wildlife, particularly at nesting sites,

being disturbed by off-road vehicles, jetskis, horses, dogs and guided tours.

The detrimental impacts of visitors are

greatest in fragile landscapes such as sand

dunes and sub alpine areas (and geothermal

areas).

The risk of detrimental visitor impacts

occurring is increasing with increase in

visitor numbers (mainly international

visitors), commercial activity and an

expanding range of visitor activities.



66

Nevertheless, compared with the widespread

devastation caused by introduced animal

pests, the current environmental impact of

visitors is still relatively localised and

modest in scale.

2.2 Visitor Impact Research

Research on visitor impacts has focused on

what impacts have occurred in the past. It

has examined the relationship between the

numbers, activities and behaviour of visitors

and the environmental impacts they produce.

Attempts have been made to identify the

sensitivity of different landscapes tovisitor impacts and the thresholds at which

these impacts begin to occur. However there

are still considerable gaps in our knowledge.

A 1995 Lincoln University review of visitor

impact research in New Zealand concluded

that:

Research into visitor impacts is limited in

terms of the areas studied, the type of

impact studied and their length of study.

Very little continuous monitoring is being

done

The relationships between baseline

conditions, type and level of use, the type

and degree of impact, and management

objectives/responses have not been

investigated.

Most research has focused on terrestrial

impacts, with very little done on the impacts

on wildlife or environmental quality

Individual studies have focused on only one

or two variables and do not provide a

comprehensive study of visitor impacts at a

particular site

The studies reviewed do not providesufficient information to demonstrate the

relationship between sites with similar

characteristics

Only a limited number of research methods

have been used in New Zealand

The relationship between the numbers,

activities and behaviour of visitors and the

environmental impacts they produce needs to

be better understood and more research is

clearly need in this area.



67

2.3 Goals and Guiding

Principles forProtecting Intrinsic Natural and

Historic Values.

The department’s over riding protection goal

is:

To ensure that the intrinsic natural and

historic values of areas managed by the

department are not compromised by the impacts

of visitor activities, and related facilities

and services.

In other words, the protection of intrinsic

natural and historic values is the

department’s primary concern. In managing

visitors and related facilities and services,

the objective is to avoid, reduce or minimise

the impacts on intrinsic natural and

historical values.

To achieve this goal the department’s

management actions will be guided by the

following principles:

Some sites and ecosystems (e.g., those

strictly protected as nature reserves and

some scientific reserves) are so important

because of their natural and/or historic

values that visitor access will be controlled

or even denied.

In all other areas managed by the department,

the protection of intrinsic natural and/or

historic values will take precedence over

visitor activities and the provision of

visitor services and facilities. Iwi will be

consulted to ensure that the Mäori cultural

values are protected.

Most areas will be kept in their naturalstate with little or no facilities

development, to protect intrinsic natural and

historic values and give visitors the

opportunity to experience nature on nature’s

terms.

The qualities of solitude, peace and natural

quiet will be safeguarded as far as possible,

in all areas managed by the department.

Protection of intrinsic natural and historic

values may involve setting limits on visitor

numbers, facilities, services and commercial



68

activities. Where the impacts of increasing

visitor numbers to a site are unknown the

department will adopt a precautionary

approach until such time as it is clearly

demonstrated that increasing numbers will

cause no significant problems.

Visitor activities, facilities and services

that are in keeping with and promote

understanding of intrinsic natural and

historic values, will be preferred.

Visitors will be encouraged to minimise their

impacts on intrinsic natural, historic and

cultural values.

Visitor facilities and services will be

designed, located and managed to avoid,reduce or minimise impacts on intrinsic

natural and historic values.

2.4 Managing the Protection

of Intrinsic Natural and

Historic Values

Identification of Conservation Values

The Conservation Management Strategy (CMS)

for each Conservancy attempts to broadly

assess the intrinsic natural and historic

values of areas managed by the department inthat region. In particular the CMS identifies

the significance, fragility and tolerance of:

Plants and animals

The air, water and soil

Landscape and landforms

Geological feature

Systems of interacting living organisms and

their environment (ecosystems)

Historic places

..located within a particular region.

Assessing Potential Visitor Impacts

Once the intrinsic natural and historic

values of key sites are fully understood, the

next step is to assess the impacts that

visitor facilities, services and increasing

numbers may have on these values. The answer

to this question will determine what a

suitable management regime is. As noted

above, there are considerable gaps in our

knowledge about visitor impacts and the

relationship between visitors and intrinsic



69

natural/historic values. For this reason a

precautionary approach will be taken when

determining a suitable management regime.

Deciding a Suitable Management Regime for

Visitors

Based on the assessment of intrinsic natural

and historic values and the potential visitor

impacts, a suitable management regime for

visitors can then be determined. The first

issue to be addressed is whether the effects

of the proposed visitor activities,

facilities or services are likely to be

inconsistent with the conservation of a

particular site. If the effects are deemed to

be inconsistent with conservation, the

activity will not be allowed, but there may

be a case for locating such facilities and

services outside areas managed by the

department.

If it is considered appropriate for visitors

to use and enjoy a particular site, then the

next step is to:

Decided what is an appropriate number of

visitors and set limits where necessary to

avoid or reduce impacts on intrinsic natural

and historic values Decide what are appropriate visitor

facilities and services and the appropriate

management practices and standards for these

so that the impacts on intrinsic natural and

historic values are avoided or reduced.

Promote good conservation practices for

managing visitor facilities such as energy

efficiency, recycling and waste reduction.

Encourage appropriate visitor behaviour, for

example, through promotion of the

environmental and water care codes.

The same impact evaluation steps apply where

a site already has visitors.

Monitoring Visitor Impacts

Once a management regime for visitors has

been decided and put in place, the impacts of

visitor activities, facilities and services

on the intrinsic natural and historic values

will need to be monitored. The monitoring

system will concentrate on developing an

early warning system, which will indicate



70

that steps need to be taken to prevent

further impacts occurring.

Taking Remedial Action to Prevent

Unacceptable Visitor Impacts

It is important for managers and field staff

to be aware of changes over time. This will

enable them to identify locations where rapid

change is occurring and to initiate

appropriate intervention measures or

establish ongoing monitoring projects.

If unacceptable change has occurred or

continues to occur at a site, field staff and

their managers must either take action toavoid further adverse impacts, remedy the

impact, or mitigate the severity of the

impact through one or more of the following

actions.

Reduce the use of the site/area by visitors

This can be achieved in a number of ways

e.g., by restricting visitor numbers,

imposing a limit on the length of stay,

discouraging potential visitors or improving

access, facilities and promotion on

alternative areas.

Modify visitor activities/behaviourLarge groups, visitors with pets and groups

not practising low impact behaviour can cause

problems. Unacceptable use and/or visitor

behaviour may be able to be modified so fewer

problems occur eg. limit numbers to certain

sites and erect signs to specify locations

where animals are not permitted.

Modify the timing of visitor activitiesThe fragility of some environments varies

with the time of the year. Some sites are

more popular at certain times of the year or

week with visitors, so impacts can be more

severe. In some places visitor use may be

able to be shifted to times when it is least

likely to cause impact to either the

environment or other visitors eg. bird

breeding sites closed during the breeding

season.

Move the activity/facility/service somewhere

else better able to cope



71

Visitor use can be shifted to more durable

sites, dispersed locally to reduce impacts or

concentrated on a few sites so that wider

impacts on the area are reduced.

Increase the resistance of the site

Sites can be hardened from visitor impact

through the construction of barriers and

boardwalks that separate the visitor from the

resource they are impacting upon.

Each site should be assessed on a case-by-

case basis. Making changes to what is

causing the impact (visitor numbers,

activities, and behaviour) will usually takeprecedence over increasing the resistance or

capacity of the site or area.

It is the responsibility of staff at all

levels to be observant of any impact or

adverse changes to any type of resource, to

take immediate action where necessary and to

advise the appropriate person. This

information must be presented in writing.

(in a memo, at a Monthly Operating Report

(MOR) or in the minutes of a staff meeting).

Once reported it is the responsibility of the

accountable person to activate a managementresponse.

Appendix 3 Establishing a Site’sBaseline State

For management and monitoring purposes it is

important to differentiate two types of

information - baseline state and baseline

information - because the terms sound so

similar. The baseline state is required to

establish monitoring at a specific site.Baseline information is broader and more

comprehensive, covering the wider system and

its processes and within which is the

specific site that is to be monitored.

The gathering of information (establishing

the baseline state) for monitoring programmes

will probably have limitations that need to

be acknowledged and built into the

information base. Monitoring work will help

the collection of information so that over



72

time knowledge of the site will grow to give

bigger and bigger pictures. Eventually this

should represent a broad understanding of an

area as well as of specific sites (natural,

historic, cultural), their interactions and

associated physical processes, which enables

key values to be defined and located.

Baseline State: The baseline state is the

most practical state upon which to start site

monitoring. It informs the design of the

work and helps select the correct indicators.

The baseline state information should include

the following:

The parameters or boundaries of the site tobe monitored

The current condition of the site

The management objectives of the site

The conservation resources and their values,

that require protection

Information about visitor use, visitor

behaviour, type and timing of use.

Suggested indicators that will be used for

monitoring.

(Refer to the Standard Operating Procedures -

Establishing the Baseline State).

The site must be retained in its current

state until sufficient information is

gathered to prove whether or not the site

management regime needs to be changed. This

may mean that controls on visitor use should

be implemented until sufficient results are

available for managers to determine future

numbers.

The key indicators must be sensitive to

change and alert managers of the need to act

quickly to avoid remedy or mitigate the

severity of visitor impacts. Evaluation willprove whether or not the key indicators

initially chosen were the correct ones upon

which to base the monitoring, and enable

managers to change them if necessary

Limiting Factors

Four factors limit information gathering and

introduce difficulties in identifying human

impacts.

Often no baseline data is available for

comparison to natural conditions.



73

It can be difficult to disentangle the roles

of man and nature.

There are space and time differences between

cause and effect.

In the light of ecosystem interactions it can

be difficult to isolate different components.

Some impacts take the form of naturally

occurring processes that have been

accelerated by human interference. (Wall and

Wright, 1977). At other times human

disturbance becomes insignificant when

compared to natural fluctuations and

disturbances (Schreyer, 1976) eg. Land-slides

in the Fox and Franz Josef glacier valleys.

Appendix 4 PotentialResearch Topics

This list of research topics will be

continually updated. At present potential

areas for research include socio-cultural

demographic changes in visitors to the

Wairongomai and Waitawheta sites within the

Kaimai-Mamaku Forest Park. For further

information contact the conservancy

Recreation Planner on 0064 7349 7411





Tourism, Recreation Research and Education

Centre, Lincoln University, Christchurch.

Crawford K., Phillips J., Ward J., Hughey K.,

2001, Biophysical Impacts of Tourism: An

Annotated Bibliography , Tourism, Recreation

Research and Education Centre, Lincoln

University, Christchurch.

Urlich S., Ward J., Hughey K., 2001,

Environmental Indicators of Tourism Impacts

on Three Natural Assets on the West Coast,

Aotearoa, New Zealand , Tourism, Recreation

Research and Education Centre, Lincoln

University, Christchurch.

Ward J. and Beanland R., 1996, Biophysical

Impacts of Tourism. Information Paper Number

56, Centre for Resource Management, Lincoln

Environmental, Centre for Resource

Management, Lincoln University.

Booth K.L. and Cullen R. 1995, Recreation

Impacts in Devlin P. J., Corbett R.A. and

Peebles C.J. Outdoor Recreation In New

Zealand Vol. 1: A Review and Synthesis of the

Research Literature.

McQueen, D. 1991, Environmental Impact of Recreational Use on DOC Estate: (1)

Guidelines on track location, management and

repair. Prepared for DoC by PSIR Land

Resources, Wellington

McQueen D., Williams P. and Lilley G. 1991,

Environmental Impacts of Recreational Use on

DoC Estate: (2) Effects of Camping Prepared

for DoC by PSIR Land Resources, Wellington

Documents

BOPCO-28657 BOP Visitor Monitoring Plan 2004-2009