[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Public Area Recreation Visitors Survey A Socioeconomic Profile of Recreationists at Public Outdoor Recreation Sites in Coastal Areas: Volume 1 Vernon R. Leeworthy and Norman F. Meade August 1989 NORTH CAROLINA SOUTH CAROLINA MISSISSIPPI ALABAMA GEORGIA FLORIDA SAMPLED SITES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration A F.R OF 11T392 .S635 1989 V. 1 Coastal and Ocean Resource Economics Program The Coastal and Ocean Resource Economics Program is an evolving set of activities to develop Nationwid4: data bases, products and analytical capabilities for conducting economic assessments of activities that directly affect or are affected by the health of the nation's coastal and oceanic resources. The program is conducted by the Strategic Assessments Branch (SAB) of NOAA's Off ice of Oceanography and Marine Assessments. It's major program elements are described below. Since 1985, the program has also co-sponsored a set of annual workshops with the Environmental Protection Agency on natural resource and environmental economics to support it's major program elements. Natural Resource Economic Damage Assessments. Increased public concern over oil and hazardous substances spills and waste sites has led to the development of natural resource economic damage assessment methods and their implementation in support of litigation against the responsible parties. Beginning with the AMOCO CADIZ oil spill in 1978, SAB has been an active participant in this rapidly developing field of applied natural resource economics (see Measuring the Social Costs of Oil Spills: The Amoco Cadiz Study). Inadidition to carrying out several previous marine resource damage assessments in support of litigation, SAB is currently helping to design and implement the governments claim forriatural resource damage in the EXXON VALDEZ case. Inventory and Value of Coastal Recreation. Because outdoor recreation has been identified as thesingle largest category of benefit from the improvements in water quality, SAB began to develop a program -to inventory and value coastal recreation. The first product of this program was a data base and report "Public EKpenditures on Outdoor Recreation in the Coastal Areas of the U.S.A. (1986)" This led to development of an inventory all publicly owned and/or managed recreation areas and facilities in the Nation's coastal areas. Summaries for 21 states and 25 groups of estuaries, by county and level of government, are available in a recently published atlas titled "National Estuarine Inventory, Data Atlas: Public Recreation Facilities in Coastal Areas (1988)." A complementary inventory of all privately owned and managed recreation facilities is also being developed through a cooperative agreement between NOAA and the U.S. Forest Service. Plans are to complete this inventory, Coastal Recreation Inventory, in 1991. PublicArea Recreation Visitors Survey (PAR VS). PARVS is an ongoing intergovernmental cooperative research project involving seven federal and twelve state agencies. The survey was designed to provide data needed to develop highly credible and broadly comparable estimates of the economic importance of providing recreational opportunities on public lands. PARVS also enables development of detailed information about recreation uses and users and can provide estimates of the direct monetary value derived by users of public recreation areas, User values are critical to analyses of conflicts and trade-offs between recreation and other resource uses. In 1987, SAB initiated the effort to collect data at coastal recreation sites. To date, more than 12,000 interviews have been conducted at forty public outdoor recreation sites in the coastal areas of the U.S.A. For more information on NOAA's Coastal and Oceanic Resource Economics Program, write to: Vernon R. Leeworthy Strategic Environmental Assessments Division, N/ORCA1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1305 East-West Highway, 9th Floor Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301) 713-3000 I A Socioeconomic Profile of Recreationists at Public Outdoor Recreation Sites in Coastal Areas: Volume 1 Vernon R. Leeworthy and Norman F. Meade August, 1989 Agencies Survey Questionnaires Data Base Reports and Valuation ..... . ... NOAA Trip Profile Origin- Destination Informalion Economic Valuation Series of Reports U.S.D.A. Annual Activity Profile Information Forest Demographic Profile Requests Service Scanned for Computer Entry Mainframe/PC SAS Database University of Trip Profile Travel Cost Models Georgia Contingent Valuation Questions Contingent Valuation Trip Experience Evalualion Models Scanned for Computer Entry L Agencies Managing Sites National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment Ocean Assessments Division Strategic Assessment Branch 6001 Executive Blvd., Rm. 220 Ro@'"@@, W0852 NOAA/cCEH 1990 HOBSON AVE. CHAS.SC 29408-2623 LA- Contents Page Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 Survey Design .......................................................................................................................1 Profile of Visitors ..................................................................................................................1 Type and Extent of Activities ............................................................................................3 Spending by Visitors .............................................................................................................4 Willing ness-to-Pay .................................................................................................................4 On-going and Future Activies ...........................................................................................5 Footnotes ..................................................................................................................................6 References ...............................................................................................................................6 Figures and Tables ...............................................................................................................9 Figures 1 . Recreation Sites Surveyed During the Summer 1987 ............................... 10 2. U.S. Bureau of the Census Regions and Divisions of the United States ................................................................................................................. 11 3. Comparison of Family Income Distributions for In-State and Out-of-State Visitors to Myrtle Beach State Park, South Carolina ............ 12 Tables 1 . Managing Agencies and Number of Completed Interviews for the 1987 PARVS Coastal Sites .................................................................... 13 2. Distribution of Surveyed Visitors by Census Division or Country of Residence ............................................................................................... 14 3. Distribution of In-State and Out-of-State Visitors, by Site ........................ 15 4. Average Distance Traveled to the Ten Coastal Sites .............................. 16 5. Age Distribution of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A . ....................................................................................... 17 6. Gender and Racial Composition of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A . ................................................................... 18 7. Distribution of All Visitors by Highest Education Level Attained, by Site .................................................................................................... 19 8. Distribution of Family Income of Visitors, by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. e .................................................................. 20 9. Distribution of Visitors by Group Size ...................................................... 21 10. Distribution of Visitors by Group Type .................................................... 22 11. Average Annual Number of Days on Site and Trips to the Site, and the Average Length of Stay on Site for the Interview Trip ....................... 23 12a. Ranking of the Top Ten Main Activities of Visitors Age 16 and Older ....................................................................................................... 24 Contents (continued) Tables (continued) Page 12b. Ranking of the Top 15 Activities of Visitors of All Ages ............................. 25 13. Average Daily On-site Fees and Trip Expenditures Per Person Interviewed ......................................................................................... 26 14. Maximum Willingness-to-Pay for an Annual Vehicle Pass for the Interview Site Versus Any Site the Agency Manages ........................... 27 15. Willing ness-to- Pay Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - On-site Survey .............................................................................................................. 28 16. Willing ness-to- Pay for Vehicle Pass to Site: Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - Mailback Survey ............................................ 29 17. Satisfaction Ratings on a Scale from 1 to 10 ............................................... 30 Appendix A: Site Profiles ................................................................................................. 31 (List of Coastal and Ocean Resource Economics Program Publications on inside back cover.) Introduction ers. Figure 1 shows the geographic dispersion of the ten PARVS coastal sites, while Table 1 lists the man- This report summarizes information collected during aging agencies for each site. Detailed profiles of the the summer of 1987 through surveys conducted at sites are included in Appendix A. seven state and three federally managed parks in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Number of Responses. Overall, 2,441 interviews Mississippi. Over 2,400 on-site (intercept) interviews were completed on-site (intercept survey) while 821 were completed from June 20, 1987 to August 31, follow-up mailbacks were received, for an overall 1987 at the ten sites. An additional 821 mailback mailback response rate of about 34 percent (Table 1). questionnaires have been completed. Each site was targeted for at least 300 on-site inter- views, however, in only four cases was this achieved. Tabular summaries of the following information are Bad weather, low visitation and incomplete surveys contained in this report: 1) socio-demographic pro- (i.e., interviews discontinued before completion) ex- files of users; 2) type and extent of recreation activi- plain the less than targeted number of on-site inter- ties engaged in; 3) types and amount of expenditures views. No explanation is readily available for the low on recreation activities; and 4) willingness-to-pay for mailback response rate at several sites. park access and satisfaction ratings. Also, included are detailed profiles of the ten sites from the NOAA Sampling. The number of interviews at each site Inventory of Public Recreation Areas and Facilities in were stratified across various access points and time Coastal Areas. This information is intended for recrea- of week (weekdays versus weekends) to give proper tion planners and managers and business marketing representation of the various recreation activities agentsthat require simple summary information onthe available at each site. The sampling frame was a uses and users of coastal recreation sites. vehicle, while the sampling unit was an individual. One person was randomly selected from each randomly .Future reports will detail estimates of activity and site selected vehicle. Only those age 16 and older were specific user values currently being developed using interviewed. Demographic information was collected travel cost demand models and contingent valuation, on up to seven people traveling in the vehicle.. The techniques. number of-people in each vehicle that -participated in each activity was also collected. The mailback survey was sent to the person that was interviewed unless Survey Design someone else paid fortheir expense&. I n these cases, the person that paid expenses was identified and that person received the mailback portion of the survey. survey Ouestionnaires. Data collection employed two survey questionnaires: 1) an intercept (completed using a face-to-f ace interview) and 2) a mailback. The Profile of Visitors intercept, oron-site questionnaire, obtains information on the users and uses of the site and other information Information on the users of marine recreational re- necessary for recreational demand modeling. The sources, such as where they come from, how far they mailback questionnaire is used in a follow-up survey to travel to get there, their age distribution, gender and obtain detailed information on trip-related expendi- racial composition, education levels, family incomes, tures, willingness-to-pay for park access using contin- group type and size are all important for assessing gent valuation questions, and user satisfaction ratings current and future demands for park services. These on a 1 to 10 scale. The mailback survey also provides data are also used in economic impact studies to information necessary for estimating the importance estimate the demand for other goods and services of parks to local and regional economies. from local areas surrounding the parks. Site Selection. Sites were selected from the NOAA MarketArea. Home zip code, state, and county was Inventory of Public Recreation Areas and Facilities in obtained from each person interviewed on-site. This Coastal Areas based on several criteria: 1) they had information has been aggregated into Bureau of the to be adjacent to tidal or ocean waters; 2)thesiteshad Census "census divisions" to show the market areas to have at least 100,000 visitors annually; 3) they had for each of the ten sites (Table 2). Each of the census to have camping facilities to house interviewers; 4)the divisions is made up of a group of states and can be majority of site usage had to take place during the further aggregated into fourcensus regions (Figure 2). summer season; 5) the sites had to be geographically dispersed; and 6) the managing agencies had to agree As expected, the census division in which the site is to provide on-site logistical support for the interview- located accounts for the majority of visitors. The nine 1 sites located in the South Atlantic receive from 64 sites, this yielded a one-way travel distance of only percent (Cape Hatteras National Seashore) to 91 about 240 miles, or about 30 percent less than the percent (Ft. McAllister State Historic Park) of their unadjusted measure. No adjustments were made to visitors from within the census division. Gulf Islands the distances traveled for visitors to Carolina Beach -Nationali.Se ashore, which is located in two census State Park, Myrtle Beach State Park and only an divisions (South Atlantic and East South Central) insignificant adjustment was made to- visitors of Ft. derives only about 51 percent of its visitors from within McAllister State Historic Park because these sites these two divisions. @However, when the adjacent were either the gD__1v_ destination or they were the West South Central division is included, over 76 per- l2rima!@j destination of the trip. cent of the visitors are accounted for. The second measure received another adjustment for Forassessing local and regional economic impacts, in about two percent of the sample: those that visited the terms of sales, employment, income, tax revenues, siteswhile enroute home from a previously visited site. and the cost of local services, it sometimes is important 'In these cases, the distance from the most efficient to know more detail about travel patterns than Table 2 path home -to the site where interviewed was calcu- provides. Table 3 shows the in-state and out-of-state lated (see footnote 3, Table 4). This adjustment made distribution of visitors for all ten sites. Two of the three only a small difference in the averages reported in National Seashores (Cape Hatteras and Gulf Islands) Table4. However, in individual cases the adjustments draw most of their visitors from outside the states could be quite large. It may, therefore, be an important where they are located. These sites are important to element for improving the results of travel cost model- their states' economies because they stimulate an ing. This possibility will be tested in future research. influx of expenditures from non-residents. - Age Distribution of All Visitors. Table 5 shows the Distances Traveled to the Sites. For modeling age distribution of all visitors to the ten sites. The recreational demand, it is important to know how far actual age of up to seven people traveling in each visitors travel to the sites. From this information, a vehicle interviewed was obtained. Eight age groups proxy for the willi ngness-to-pay, or price, of siteaccess were formed to correspond to those used by the is constructed. This is generally referred to as the- Bureau-of the Census. This allows forthe comparison "travel cost method. " See Bockstael et. a[. (1986) for of age distributions across the relevant market areas a review of this popular method for modeling recrea- (i.e., states where the sites are located).- Differences tion demand. between the age distributions in the general market area for each site and the age distributions of visitors One of the many issues debated in travel cost model- of each site suggest that age may be an -important ing isthe proper specification of distance traveled. For factor in explaining park visitation. single purpose, single-destination trips, total distance to the site, or total round trip mileage, is appropriate. Gender and Racial Composition of Ali Visitors. However, when multiple purpose or multiple destina- The only significant differences in the male - female tiontrips are involved, totaldistance traveledto the site distribution between visitors at the 10 parks and the may overstate the cost of access. Information was states where the parks are located, or the U.S. as a obtained in the PARVS interviews to determine the whole, was at Cape Hatteras National Seashore and purpose of the trip and if there were destinations other Myrtle Beach State Park (Table 6). This suggests that than the park visited. Additional information was also gender may not be an important factor in explaining obtained on the primary purpose and destination of the parkvisitation. Racial composition, on the other hand, trip. If other destinations were involved, the destina- appears to be a significant factor. The percentage of tion previous to the park where the respondents were visitors that are white is signif icantly higher than forthe interviewed was obtained. From this information, general population in any of the defined market areas. three distance variables were constructed (Table 4), Education Levels of All Visitors. Education level The first measure is unadjusted and represents the may be an important factor in explaining park visfta- distance from where the trip was started to the park. tion, however, the manner inwhichthe data is reported Onaverage, visitors traveled over 340 miles one-way by the Bureau of the Census does not lend itself to tothesites. The second measure is adjusted for those direct comparison with defined market areas. It may that visited multiple sites and forwhomthe parkwhere be possible withfurtherwork on Bureau of the Census interviewed was W the primary destination of the trip. data tapes to compile comparable categories. For individuals in this category, the distance from the Another important use of this information is in park site visited previously to the site where the interview planning, to the extent that park activities are educa- took place was calculated. On average, for all ten tion dependent. Guided tours of archaeological or 2 historical sites or on nature trails where interpretive Type and Extent of Activities services are important examples. Table 7 summa- rizes the education levels of all visitors to the parks. Recreational Usage. In recreational demand model- ing, the two most important pieces of information are -Family- Income of Visitors. Many studies of recrea- a proxyfor price and a measure of quantity demanded. tional behavior have found income to be an important Recreational usage information can-provide informa- factor in explaining both recreational participation and tion necessary to obtain both these measures. For avidity. Table 8 shows the distribution of family in- example, in many studiesthe numberof tripsto the site comes of all visitors aggregated into six groups that represent the quantity demanded, while on-site time is correspond to those categories reported by the Bu- used as an input in calculating a portion of the cost of reau of the Census. The survey actually collects the trip (e.g. total on-site plus travel time multiplied by income using 12 income categories. The family in- the value of time). Both -the proxy for prices and the comes of park visitors at all ten sites are significantly measure of quantity demanded have varied across higherthan the U.S. population as a whole. This lends studies depending on the purpose and scope of the further support for the hypothesis that income is an analyses. Table 11 reports the average number of important determinant of park visitation. trips to the site over the past 12 months, the average length of stay per trip (e.g. the number of days spent Because income may also be a determinant of the on-site during the trip on which the interview was level of expenditures and that tourists or out-of-state conducted), and the percentage of single day trips. visitors generally have higher expenditures than in- For all ten sites, the average person made 3.5 trips to state visitors, the differences in mean incomes be- the site where interviewed, and spent an average of tween in-state and out-of -state visitors was tested. A -seven days there over the past 12 months. The significant difference was found at only one park,- average length of stay for the interview trip was 4.19 Myrtle Beach State Park in South Carolina. Figure 3 days, while 34.3 percent were single day trips. shows a comparison of the income distribution for in- state and out-of-state visitors to Myrtle Beach State There was a good deal of variation in these measures Park. across sites. On average, the visitors to Carolina Beach State Park made the mosttrips (9-27) and spent Group Size and Type. The average group size the most days on-site (13.29) during the past 12 across all sites consisted of five people, with a high of months, while visitors to Cumberland Island National 7.44 at SkidawayIsland State Park and a low of 3.37 Seashore made both the-fewesttrips*(1.52) andspent at Carolina Beach State Park (Table 9). In addition,. the fewest days (3.83). The average length of stay on over 50 percent of all groups in the entire sample were the- interview trip was greatest at Myrtle Beach, State of three or more people. The majority of all groups Park and Cape Hatteras National Seashore, at over were family based (Table 10). These findings are six days. Huntington Beach State Park and Ft. McAl- significant. Schomaker and Morck (1986), in a study lister State Historic Park had the shortest length of of group composition in advertisements for recreation- stay, which is consistent with the fact that both these ally related products and services, found that family sites had the highest percentage of day-trip visitors. groups and groups larger than two persons were underrepresented when compared tothe results of the Main Activities. Table 12a reports the ranking of the National Recreation Survey (1977). Family groups top ten "main" activities across all ten sites and how appeared in only five percent of the ads, with an each of these activities are ranked for each of the sites. average group size of only 2.2. The top ten activities are not ranked on the basis of the greatest number of participants in each activity, but by Group type may also be important to park managers in the percent of visitors, age 16 and older, that re- addressing the issue of imposing site fees. McCurdy sponded that a particular activity was their main activ- (1970, 1985) found that f amily groups, as opposed to ity. The greatest percent of visitors at five of the 10 single individuals,, couples, or groups of friends most -sites said they had no main-activity. At Carolina Beach readily accepted site fees. Referendum-type contin- State Park, over 82 percent said they had no main gent valuation questions on site fees, which will be activity. This suggests that modeling park demand on discussed below, are asked as part of the PARVS an activity basis-using a travel cost model may not be survey. Thus, the capability exists to further test this advisable.- The reason is that activity-specific travel proposition. cost models employ the assumption that one activity provided the main motivation forthe trip. This is clearly not true for a large proportion of this sample. 3 Activities of AY Visitors. Table 12b reports the lodging, food and travel); and 3) while visiting the site ranking of the top 15 activities. Activities are ranked on or immediate area (e.g. expenses for food, lodging, the basis of the greatest percent of participants from local travel, on-site fees, fishing bait, souvenirs, etc.). the sample of visitors of all ages. From 2,441 inter- This comprehensive expenditure profile is particularly --viewsof people 16 and older, there were 8,062 people ,..useful for analyzing the economic impact 'that visitors of all agesforwhich activity participation was reported. to parks have on local and/or regional economies.1 Since the main activity question (Table 12a) was asked only of those aged 16 and older, and the On average, a total of $234 per person was spent on majority-of these people responded that they had no trips to the ten coastal sites. About $90 per person was main activity, it is not surprising that the top ten spent while at the site or in the immediate area where activities based on participation is different from the the site is located, while $71 was spent preparing for top ten "main" activities. However, seven of the top ten the trip and/or upon return home. About $73 per "main activities" were also among the top ten activities person was spent traveling to and from the site. participated in by all visitors across all 10 sites. There are several possible problems with the trip Participation rate, by activity, varied greatly across expenditures reported in Table 13. First, they are sites. "Other Outdoor Swimming" ranked numberone unweighted for sample response bias. Second, three in five of the ten sites, butonly ranked fourteenth at Fort of the sites had low mailback response rates: Cape McAllister State Historic Site and fifteenth at nearby Hatteras National Seashore (20%); Carolina Beach Skidaway Island State Park. Differences in participa- State Park (23%); and Ft. McAllister State Historic tion rates across sites for Other Outdoor Swimming Park (12%), so there are only small samples from -may reflect differentwater qualities..- It it interesting which to derive population estimates. Third, there was that at Myrtle Beach State Park, although a majority inconsistent reporting in the breakdown across the (56.7%) participated in Other Outdoor Swimming, a three categories. Some reported lodging expendi- greater majority (77.8%) participated in, Pool Swim- tures while preparing forthe trip or upon return from the ming. trip. Those that may have paid with a credit card may have recorded paying the bill at home instead of Spending by Visitors paying for a service received in the area where they visited. Fourth, about 32 percent of the sample were Studies in the economics of outdoor recreation have on multiple destination trips. It is not clear whether all utilized-,expenditures for two purposes: 1) forspecify-. -the expenditures made, while preparing for the trip.or ing a proxy for price when modeling the demand for, upon- return home from the trip and while traveling to recreation; and 2) for economic impact analysis where-- and from the site, should be considered as attributable the impact of recreational activity is estimated on local to the site where interviewed. . Future assessments of and/or regional economies in terms of sales, employ- economic impact will have to address these problems. ment, income, tax revenues etc. It is primarily to the former purpose that NOAAintendsto applythe PARVS, Willing ness-to-Pay data. The survey used several direct approaches for meas- Onsite Fees. Table 13 reports the average daily on- uring the willingness-of -visitors to pay site access site fees paid per person. This information was ob- fees. Each of these approaches utilize the contingent tained from the intercept portion of the survey. On-site valuation method (CVM). Four separate questions fees represent a portion of the total cost of accessing were asked, one on the intercept questionnaire and a site and will be used with travel costs in constructing three in the mailback survey. Two of the questions on a proxy for price in future demand modeling work. On the mailback survey were open-ended in that the average, about $7 per person per day was spent for maximum dollar amount the individual would pay was fees on-she. This varied from a high of over $17 at asked and that individual simply fills in a dollar amount. Cumberland Island National Seashore to.a low of This represents,the more traditional CVM approach. about $1 at Carolina Beach State Park. One question was asked on-site and one on the mailback survey using a relatively new approachwhich Trip Expenditures. Table 13 also reports all trip asks Jor yes or no responses to randomly assigned related expenditures. These expenditures are broken dollar amounts. This is commonly known as the down into three categories: 1) the amount spent while referendum approach, since each person is simply preparing for the trip at home, or upon return f rorn the asked to vote yes or no to the assigned dollar amount. trip (e.g. film purchased at home in preparation for the This approach is thought to have several advantages trip and film development upon return from the trip); 2) over the open-ended question approach. For ex- while traveling to and from the site (e.g. expenses for ample, the referendum approach avoids strategic biaS2, 4 and is similarto market transactions where consumers large sample sizes may be required to achieve consis- either purchase or do not purchase a product at the tent results with this method. An overwhelming major- given market prices. The main disadvantages of this ity would be willing to pay at least one dollar per person new approach is that it requires more sophisticated per day at all sites except Carolina Beach State Park. analyses in order to-yield answers comparable.to the .. .-Given that only-29 percent of the visitors at.Carolina open-ended questions and the methods of analysis Beach State Park paid on-site fees (Table 13), this are still experimental. may reflect a protest against the charging of fees and probably does not accurately reflect the true value of Open Ended Questions. Table 14 reports the results the site. of two open-ended CVM questions on the willingness- to-pay site access f ees. The f irst question asked what Another referendum question was asked on the mail- was the maximum amount the individual would be back portion of the survey. This question was the lead- willing to pay for an annual vehicle pass that would in to the maximum amount question asked for the permit access to the site for all persons in the vehicle. annual vehicle pass discussed above. Again as ex- The pass would apply to the interview site Daly- and pected, the percent of yes votes declines with in- would only cover site admission, not any other fees creased dollar amounts with few exceptions (Table (i.e., camping). The average for all sites was $8.30. 16). As on the intercept questionnaire, when the Three sites have insufficient numbers of returned results are aggregated across all sites, all inconsisten- mailbacks to give reliable statistical results, but are cies disappear. The majority of those completing the reported since they are not statistically different from mailback for all sites reported they would pay at least the values at other sites. $5.00 per year for such a pass, and at all but two sites the majority would pay $10.00. The second open-ended question again asked for the maximum amount the individual would be willing to Satisfaction Ratings. The final section of the mail- pay for an annual vehicle pass, but the pass would back survey asks visitors to rate their satisfaction with allow admission to all sites the agency manages. It the site on a scale from 1 to 10. Table 17 shows the was expected that the willing ne ss-to-pay for this type mean values and the distribution of the ratings. The of pass would be higher than the pass that allows average for all sites was 8.22. The National Sea- access to only one site, since it is expected that the shores generally had the highest ratings, with very few option to visit additional sites may have some value. negatives (i.e. no rating of three or less). With few exceptions, this seems to be true, however, f utute research will more rigorously test this hypothe- On-Going and Future Activities sis. Data Collection. In the summer of 1988,14 additional The results presented here are only preliminary since coastal sites were surveyed; 10 in the Northeast f rom several issues in analyzing the data are as yet unre- Maine to Virginia and four in the Northern Gulf of solved. The estimates in Table 14 are unweighted for Mexico region from Florida to Louisiana. Six addi- mailback response bias and neither an analysis of tional siteswere surveyed in the Southeast and Gulf of protest bids (i.e. zero bids given because they do not Mexico regions of Florida and Texas during the winter like the idea of fees) nor an analysis of anchoring bias and spring of 1989. During the summer of 1989, an (caused by placing the referendum question before additional 10 sites on the West Coast from California the open-ended question) have been conducted. In to Washington will be surveyed. At the completion of the latter case, the true maximum amount may not the 1989 interview season, the coastal portion of have been given because the individual may be bias- PARVS will include information on about 40 sites and ing their bid toward the randomly assigned dollar contain survey data on over 12,000 visitors to coastal amount asked in the referendum question. These recreation sites across the nation. issues are currently being researched. .Because the forty sites selected in the coastal PARVS Referrendum Questions. Table 15 presents the sample have a mostly coastal beach focus, there may percentage of yes votes for each of the ten randomly be a need to expand the sample of PARVS sites to @assigned,-per@person per-day charges for site admis- Anclude @other -types,of- sites such as wildlife refuges, sion that was asked on the intercept questionnaire. As hunting/game management areas and nature pre- expected, the percent of yes votes generally decline at serves. This would provide the capability to develop a higher dollar amounts. There are several inconsisten- more comprehensive set of activity and site specific cies where higher percents of yes' occur at higher user day values for coastal recreation. dollar amounts. When aggregated across all ten sites these inconsistencies disappear, suggesting relatively 5 Estimation of User Day Values. Researchers at Footnotes SAB and North Carolina State University are currently developing travel cost demand models and contingent 1. The U.S. Forest Service has developedan ana- valuation methods using the data summarized in this lytic capability for assessing economic impacts called report. -These methods will be assessed for their ability - IMPLAN. IMPLANprovidesplanninganalysts with the to produce consistent and credible estimates of activ- capability to construct a local andlor regional input- ity and site specific user day values. output model for any applicable area and to perform Once accepted, these methods will be applied to the evaluations ofpotential economic effects of alternative data collected at the remaining thirty sites around the courses of action. -See Cordell et. al. (1987) for an Nation. The result will be a National set of user day example. values developed with a consistent set of data and 2. The overstatement of!villingness-to-pay when methodologies. it is perceived that the fee will not be charged but will leadto parkprotection orimprovement, orunderstate- Site Valuation. For many policy and management ment if it is perceived management is planning to decisions, it is important to knowthe total annual value impose fees but the individual is reasonably sure the generated by a site. Here user day values must be park will still be protected. See Desvouges et. al, aggregated. Estimates of total site use by activity are (1983) for a discussion of biases. required. Updates of total annual site visitation are being compiled for all sites surveyed (See Appendix A for site visitation for 1984, 1982, 1977 and 1972 from References -NOAA- Inventory-of Recreation Areas and Facilities) in cooperation with the state and federal agencies Bockstael, N.E., Hanemann, W.M. and Strand, I.E., managing the site. 1986, "Benefit Analysis Using Indirect or Im- Changes In Site Oualities. Total loss of a site is more puted Market Methods." Measuring the Benefits rare than small, sometimes contiuous changes in site of Water Quality Improvements Using Recrea- qualities. Degradation of the site by water and air tion Demand Models, Vol. 2. Washington, D.C.: pollution and debris washed-up on shorelines result in Environmental Protection Agency, Office of losses in site value due to losses in user day values Policy Analysis, CR - 811043-01 -0, Universityof and lowervisitation rates. Future research effortswill Maryland, 1986. attempt to model (in a.broad regional or National context) the losses in site values due to reductions in Cordell, H. Ken, Bergstrom, John C. and Watsoh@ Allan' site qualities. The major focus will be on waterquality. A.,1987, "Report on Estimates of Economic Impact of Proposed Recreational Development Total Value of Coastal Recreation. A much more at Land Between the Lakes." A final report of an ambitious goal of the SAB program is to place a total economic assessment study prepared for the annual value on all coastal recreation sites. To Tennessee Valley Authority, Land Between the accomplish this, estimates of total coastal recreational Lakes, Golden Pond, Kentucky 42231. Report use are required. Very little information currently prepared by the U.S. D.A. Forest Service, Out- exists. door Recreation and Wilderness Assessment Group, Southeastern Forest Experiment Sta- To remedy this, SAB will be working with the U.S. D.A. tion, Athens, Georgia. Forest Service and the National Park Service in Desvousges, William H., Smith, V. Kerry and McGivney, modifying the 1991 National Recreation Survey to Matthew P., 1983. "A Comparison of Alternative obtain total use estimates for coastal recreation. Approaches for Estimation of Recreation and Athough sample sizes will be too small to provide more Related Benefits of Water Quality Improve- than broad regional estimates of use, the study com- ments". Washington, D.C.: Environmental bined with PARVS data and analysis will provide the Protection Agency, Office of Policy and Plan- capability to provide regional and National estimates ning. ,of thelotal value of coastal recreation. McCurdy, Dwight R., 1970, "Recreation ists Attitudes Toward User Fees: Management Implications." Journal of Forestry. 68 (8): 645-646. McCurdy, Dwight R., 1985, Park Management. Car- bondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press. Schomaker, John N. and Morck, Victoria L., 1986, "Representation of Outdoor Recreation in Maga- zine Advertisements". In Proceedings: South- ern Recreation Research Conference, Febru- ary 1986. Asheville, North Carolina. Smith, V. Kerry and Desvousges, William H., 1986, Measuring Water Quality Benefits. Kluiver- Nyhoff Publishing, Boston, Massachusetts, Strategic Assessment Branch. TheNOAA Inventory of Public Recreation Areas and Facilities in Coastal Areas. Rockville, MD: National Oce- anic and Atmospheric Administration. 7 List of Figures and Tables* Figures 1. Recreation Sites Surveyed During the Summer 1987. 2. U.S. Bureau of the Census Regions and Divisions of the United States. 3. Comparision of Family Income Distributions for In-State and Out-of-State Visitors to Myrtle Beach State Park, South Carolina. Tables 1. Managing Agencies and Number of Completed Interviews for the 1987 PARVS Coastal Sites. 2. Distribution of Surveyed Visitors by Census Division or Country of Residence. 3: Distribution of In-State and. Out-of -State Visitors, by Site. 4. Average Distance Traveled to the Ten Coastal Sites. 5. Age Distribution of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. 6. Gender and Racial Composition of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. 7. Distribution of All Visitors by Highest Education Level Attained, by Site. 8. Distribution of Family Income of Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. 9- Distribution of Visitors by Group Size. 10. Distribution of Visitors by Group Type. 11. Average Annual Number of Days on Site and Trips to the Site, and the Average Length of Stay on Site for the Interview Trip. 12. A) Ranking of the Top Ten Main Activities of Visitors Age 16 and Older. B) Ranking of the Top 15 Activities of Visitors of All Ages. 13. Average Daily On-site Fees and Trip Expenditures Per Person Interviewed. 14. Maxmum Willingness-to-Pay for an Annual Vehicle Pass for the Interview Site Versus Any Site the Agency Manages. 15. Willingness-to-Pay Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - On-site Survey. 16. Willingness-to-Pay for Vehicle Pass to Site: Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - Mailback Survey. 17. Satisfaction Ratingson a Scale from 1 to 10. *MORE DETAILED DATA IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. 9 Figure 1. Recreation Sites Surveyed During Summer 1987 North Carolina Ca South Carolina Carolina B Mississippi Alabama Georgia Myrtle Beach State Par untington Beach State P disto Beach State Park Skiclaway Island State Park ort McAllister State Historic Site ekyll Island State Park Cumberland Island National Seas Florida Gulf Islands National Seashore 0 LD -igure 2. U.S. Bureau of the Census Regions and Divisions of the United States. WEST MIDWEST Washington North Dakota Mlnnesota Montana Oregon Wisconsin South Dakota WEST NORTH Michigan PACIFIC Idaho CENTRA EAST Iowa NORTH Wyoming Nebraska CENTRAL K40UNTAIN Illinois Ohio Indiana Nevada Lltah Kansas Missouri Colorado California 'Lj Kentucky Vi Tennessee ArIzona EAST New Mexico Oklahoma SOUTH LIT Arkansas CENTRAL ATLA IC Mississippi WEST SOUTH Alabama CENTRAL Georgia Texas Louisiana PACIFIC 00 SOUTH Alaska Hawaii Figure 3. A Comparison of Family Income Distributions for In-State and Out-of-State Visitors to Myrtle Beach State Park, South Carolina 35 30 25 20 d- 15 10 5 < 10 10-20 1 20-30 1 30- 40 40-50 1 > 50 Family Income ($ Thousands) In-State Visitors Out-of-State Visitors 12 Table 1. Managing Agencies and Number of Completed Interviews for the 1987 PARVS Coastal Sites Number of Interviews State/Site Managing Agency On-site Mailback North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore National Park Service 191 40 Carolina Beach State Park NC Dept. of Natural Resources 148 33 & Community Development, Division of Parks & Recreation South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park SC Dept. of Parks, Recreation & 306 74 Tourism, State Parks Division Huntington Beach State Park 195 93 Edisto Beach State Park 330 1 18 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park GA Dept. of Natural Resources, 245 71 Division of Parks, Recreation & Historic Sites Ft. McAllister State Historic Park It 93 1 1 Jekyll Island State Park Jekyll Island Authority 373 163 Cumberland Island National Seashore National Park Service 299 118 Florida - Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore National Park Service 261 100 All Ten Sites 2,441 821 Table 2: Distribution of Surveyed Visitors by Census Division or Country of Residence* Sites (Percent)" All Division/Country 10 Cape Carolina Myrtle Huntington Edisto Skidaway Fort Cumberland Jekyll Gulf sites Hatteras Beach Beach Beach Beach Island McAllister Island Island Islands Now England 0.7 1.1 0.0 1.0 2.6 0.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.2 Middle Atlantic 4.1 11.6 6.2 3.9 8.9 1.5 3.0 3.4 3.2 1.3 2.7 ........... ................. ........ ....... . ....... .. ... South Atlantic 71.8 ,6 .... ..... . ........ ..... ......... ................ ........... East North Central 6.1 12.7 4.1 8.2 7.9 5.2 5.9 1.1 4.3 3.4 7.3 East South Central 7.7 3.2 4.8 4.6 5.8 4.2 4.6 0.0 5.6 5.0 West North Central 1.8 2.6 0.7 0.7 0.0 2.1 0.8 1.1 0.8 1.3 7.3 West South Central 3.9 0.5 0.0 1.3 .0.5 0.6 3.8 1.1 1.6 1.0 25.4 Mountain 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.7 1.5 Pacific 1.4 1.6 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.9 3.4 2.2 1.3 2.0 1.9 Canada 0.9 1.1 1.4 2.6 0.5 1.5 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 All other Foreign 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.5 0.9 4.2 0.0 0.5 1.7 1.2 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100,0 100,0 100.0 100.0 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census Divisions Toned areas show Census Division within which the site is located. Table 3. Distribution of In-State and Out-of-State Visitors, by Site Visitors State/Site In-State Out-of-State North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 22.5 77.5 Carolina Beach State Park 70.3 29.7 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 52.0 48.0 Huntington Beach State Park 47.2 52.8 Edisto Beach State Park 62.8 37.2 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 50.2 49.8 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 77.4 22.6 Jekyll Island State Park 63.0 37.0 Cumberland Island National Seashore 60.9 39.1 Florida - Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 29.5* 70.5 *Includes Florida and Mississippi Residents 15 Table 4. Average DistanceTraveled to the Ten Coastal Sites Average Miles to Site From Where From Site From Most Efficient State/Site Started Trip Previously Visited 2 Path Home 3 North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 435 409 408 Carolina Beach State Park 257 257 257 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 294 294 294 Huntington Beach State Park 100 78 78 Edisto Beach State Park 297 256 253 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 573 206 190 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 86 85 85 Jekyll Island State Park 321 215 205 Cumberland Island National Seashore 357 241 239 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 520 323 312 All Ten Sites 343 246 241 1 Most people (91%) started the trip from their home, so for the majority, this represents the distance from their home to the site. 2About 32 percent of the sample were on trips where they visited multiple sites. Of these, about 50 percent (i.e., 16 percent of the entire sample) did not designate the site (where they were interviewed) as their primary destination. For those that visited other sites and the site of interview was not the primary destination, the distance from the site visited previously to the site of the interview was calculated. 3About 2 percent of the sample stopped at the site of the interview while enroute home. In these cases, the distance of the most efficient path home was calculated. For example, those who may have visited Disney World in Orlando, Florida and who live in N. Y., N. Y. would (it is assumed) be traveling on 1-95 North. If they decided to stop at Skidaway Island State Park (just south of Savannah, GA), the mileage from 1-95 to Skidaway island was calculated. in most cases this had little effect on the means, however, they may play a greater role in travel cost modelling, where individual differences were sometimes great. Table 5. Age Distrbution of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. Age Group (Percent) State/Site <15 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65> North Carolina 23 10 10 16 12 10 9 10 Cape Hatteras National Seashore 5 10 6 26 31 8 9 4 Carolina Beach State Park 14 13 11 24 20 10 5 3 South Carolina 24 10 10 17 11 10 9 9 Myrtle Beach State Park 28 11 7 18 20 8 5 3 Huntington Beach State Park 23 8 7 21 21 10 6 4 Edisto Beach State Park 28 9 8 18 18 9 6 4 Georgia 24 10 9 17 12 10 9 9 Skidaway Island State Park 5 7 9 21 22 15 13 8 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 29 3 5 18 13 14 10 8 Jekyll Island State Park 24 11 8 21 17 9 6 4 Cumberland Island National Sea, hore 22 9 7 24 23 8 5 2 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 27 8 6 18 18 12 7 4 All 10 Sites 22 9 7 21 20 10 7 4 South Atlantic 22 9 9 16 11 10 10 12 U.S.A. Average 25 7 9 17 11 10 10 11 00 Table 6. Gender and Racial Composition of All Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U. S. A. Gender/Racial Composition (Percent) Native Asian/ State/Site Males American Pacific Island Black White Other North Carolina 48.6 1 <1 22 76 <1 Cape Hatteras National Seashore 40.1 0 <1 3 95 2 Carolina Beach State Park 44.9 0 <1 1 98 0 South Carolina 48.6 <1 <1 30 69 <1 Myrtle Beach State Park 42.9 0 <1 4 95 <1 Huntington Beach State Park 48.5 0 <1 8 91 <1 Edisto Beach State Park 47.6 2 1 14 82 1 Georgia 48.3 <1 <1 27 72 <1 Skidaway Island State Park 47.9 1 1 5 91 2 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 50.7 0 <1 9 90 <1 Jekyll Island State Park 52.3 1 <1 8 90 <1 Cumberland Island National Seashore 50.0 0 <1 2 97 <1 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 48.2 1 2 1 95 1 All Ten Sites 47.9 <1 <1 6 92 <1 South Atlantic 48.4 <1 < 1 21 78 < 1 U. S.A. Average 48.6 <1 2 12 83 3 Table 7. Distribution of All Visitors by Highest Education Level Attained, by Site Education Levels (Percent completed) 8th Grade 9th-1 1 th High School 13-15 College Graduate State/Site or Less Grade Graduate Years Graduate Education North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 5.9 8.8 22.9 25.6 23.3 13.6 Carolina Beach State Park 12.7 16.8 33.3 18.6 15.5 3.1 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 27.1 8.9 35.5 16.0 10.9 1.6 Huntington Beach State Park 21.7 10.9 19.1 23.7 15.1 9.5 Edisto Beach State Park 29.8 9.6 23.4 18.1 10.6 8.7 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 6.1 11.1 29.4 26.9 10.9 15.5 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 31.3 7.7 16.2 20.6 13.2 11.0 Jekyll Island State Park 24.4 11.2 22.2 18.0 13.5 10.8 Cumberland Island National Seashore 21.6 7.8 13.5 15.3 23.9 18.0 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 25.0 8.1 25.9 20.2 13.1 7.7 All Ten Sites 22.4 9.7 23.7 19.3 14.7 10.1 Table 8. Distribution of Family Income of Visitors by Site, Compared to the States and the U.S.A. Family Income Before Taxes (Percent) Less Than $10,000- $20,000- $30,000- $40,000- $50,000 State/Site $10,000 19,999 29,999 39,999 49,999 and over North Carolina 33.9 33.4 19.8 7.6 2.6 2.6 Cape Hatteras National Seashore 1.6 10.3 22.2 19.4 17.8 28.7 Carolina Beach State Park 13.6 18.5 23.5 19.7 13.6 11.1 South Carolina 33.6 32.5 20.5 8.0 23 2.7 Myrtle Beach State Park 3.6 18.1 28.6 26.5 13.8 9.4 Huntington Beach State Park 5.0 10.6 18.9 28.3 15.0 22.2 Edisto Beach State Park 6.9 15.5 23.1 22.4 19.3 12.7 Georgia 33.5 30.6 19.8 8.9 3.5 3.7 Skidaway Island State Park 6.9 16.5 18.4 18.8 21.1 18.3 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 9.4 17.6 23.5 22.3 17.7 15.3 Jekyll Island State Park 3.6 16.1 17.0 15.5 17.6 30.5 Cumberland Island National Seashore 5.4 12.3 19.9 17.8 17.7 26.9 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 3.7 15.3 .22.7 21.5 19.0 17.7 South Atlantic 31.2 31.1 20.3 9.4 3.9 4,2 U.S.A. Average 29.1 29.5 21.7 10.7 4.5 4.6 All Ten Sites 4.9 14.7 21.5 21.2 17.6 20.2 Table 9. Distribution of Visitors by Group Size Group Size (Percent of total) Average State/Site Group Size One Two Three-Four Five and Up North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 4.54 3.2 28.8 35.0 33.0 Carolina Beach State Park 3.37 17.2 30.1 31.5 21.2 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 3.41 10.4 29.7 40.9 19.0 Huntington Beach State Park 3.97 7.5 40.1 34.8 17.6 Edisto Beach State Park 4.61 2.1 26.1 33.1 38.7 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 7.44 2.1 34.4 34.8 28.7 Ff. McAllister State Historic Park 6.41 9.8 26.1 35.9 28.3 Jekyll Island State Park 5.11 2.1 31.9 29.2 36.8 Cumberland Island National Seashore 4.99 2.4 30.1 29.2 38.3 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 4.69 1.6 31.9 32.7 33.9 All Ten Sites 4.84 4.8 31.0 33.2 31.0 ro N Table 10. Distribution of Visitors by Group Type Group Type (Percent) More than Friends and Organized One State/Site Farnily One Family FarTfily Friends Group Person Other North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 62.4 6.3 13.8 11.6 2.6 3.2 0.0 Carolina Beach State Park 56.3 0.0 5.8 13.6 1.0 17.2 6.1 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 72.8 0.4 6.6 8.2 1.2 10.4 0.4 Huntington Beach State Park 68.1 0.5 6.9 17.0 0.0 7.5 0.0 Edisto Beach State Park 74.5 4.0 6.5 12.0 0.3 2.1 0.6 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 74.2 2.9 6.3 9.6 4.6 2.1 0.4 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 66.3 3.3 8.7 9.8 1.1 9.8 1.1 Jekyll Island State Park 52.5 9.9 10.2 21.5 3.5 2.1 0.3 Cumberland Island National Seashore 56.3 4.8 11.9 21.7 3.1 2.4 0.0 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 72.4 1.9 8.6 13.2 0.4 1.6 1.9 All Ten Sites 66.1 4.1 8.8 14.6 2.0 3.9 0.5 Table 11. Average Annual Number of Days on Site and Trips to the Site, and the Average Length of Stay on Site for the Interview Trip Annual Interview Trip % Single State/Site Days Trips Days Day Trips North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 7.83 2.14 6.18 13.2 Carolina Beach State Park 13.79 9.27 4.75 22.4 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 9.48 3.61 6.31 30.7 Huntington Beach State Park 5.26 4.14 1.96 83.4 Edisto Beach State Park 7.55 3.08 5.00 26.6 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 4.54 1.92 3.23 21.9 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 8.19 7.14 2.01 51.6 Jekyll Island State Park 6.70 3.91 3.66 36.6 Cumberland Island National Seashore 3.83 1.52 3.04 41.5 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 7.64 3.33 4.46 26.1 All Ten Sites 7.13 3.52 4.19 34.3 ro Table 12a. Ranking of the Top Ten Main Activities of Visitors Age 16 and Older* Sites (Rank and Percent) All Ten Cape Carolina Myrtle Huntington Edisto Skidaway Fort Jekyll Cumberland Gulf Sites Hatteras Beach Beach Beach Beach Island McAllister Island Island Island Activities Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % No Main Activity 1 30.0 2 22.5 1 82.4 4 8.2 3 13.3 1 44.1 2 21.2 5 3.3 1 37.2 1 20.7 1 58.2 Developed Camping 2 14.8 5 5.2 3 2.7 1 42.2 4 12.3 3 10.6 1 26.9 3 21.5 6 4.6 2 13.4 3 6.5 Other Outdoor Swimming 3 13.8 1 36.6 2 7.4 5 4.6 1 25.6 2 17.8 9 2.0 - 0.0 2 16.4 5 9.7 2 14.9 Sightseeing 4 5.7 3 15.2 6 1.4 8 0.3 2 14.4 7 3.0 5 7.3 - 0.0 11 1.6 4 12.4 5 3.4 Picnicking 5 5.0 - 0.0 7 0.7 3 16.7 5 6.2 8 2.4 4 7.3 1 24.7 10 2.7 14 0.3 - 0.0 Pool Swimming 6 4.4 - 0.0 - 0.0 2 21.9 - 0.0 - 0.0 3 9.8 - 0.0 7 4.3 - 0.0 - 0.0 Saltwater Fishing 7 4.2 6 2.6 4 2.0 6 3.9 9 3.1 4 4.2 8 2.4 4 18.3 4 7.2 15 0.3 4 4.2 Visiting Historical Sites 8 3.3 4 6.8 - '0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 6 6.5 2 23.7 9 2.9 8 3.7 7 1.9 Wildlife Observation 9 2.2 8 1.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 8 3.6 - 0.0 10 1.6 - 0.0 - 0.0 3 13.0 12 0.4 Sunbathing 10 2.1 7 1.0 - 0.0 7 0.3 7 4.1 6 3.6 - 0.0 0.0 5 4.8 13 1.7 6 1.9 *After the person interviewed indicated all the activities for which they participated, they were asked which, if any, activity was their main activity. Table 12b. Ranking of the Top 15 Activities of Visitors of All Ages* Sites (Rank and Percent) All Ten Cape Carolina Myrtle Huntington Edisto Skiclaway Fort Jekyll Cumberland Gulf Sites Hatteras Beach Beach Beach Beach Island McAllister Island Island Island Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Rank % Activities Other Outdoor Swimming 1 56.9 2 88.1 1 75.6 5 56.7 3 56.0 1 69.0 15 6.1 14 0.3 1 48.0 1 77.4 1 73.0 Walking For Pleasure 2 53.2 5 61.6 2 56.4 3 64.8 2 64.9 2 57.4 3 55.4 4 42.6 3 29.2 2 66.4 5 42.6 Picnicking 3 49.8 6 39.9 9 14.8 2 73.2 6 28.8 4 39.4 1 92.7 1 95.5 2 34.7 8 49.0 7 36.6 Sightseeing 4 48.2 1 89.0 3 38.2 6 45.5 1 74.6 5 35.4 2 56.9 7 23.0 4 28.9 6 52.6 3 45.3 Developed Camping 5 38.0 10 27.3 10 13.8 4 63.7 11 15.5 6 34.9 5 42.9 3 45.7 8 19.0 10 421.5 2 65.1 Visiting Historical Sites 6 28.4 4 66.7 12 9.4 18 2.2 7 22.0 12 8.3 9 22.1 2 46.0 9 17.8 3 62.7 6 38.2 Visiting Museums 7 26.1 3 67.3 6 17.5 12 9.1 12 11.5 16 3.7 6 30.1 6 34.7 11 8.1 9 46.4 4 44.1 Pool Swimming 8 25.4 15 14.1 4 29.3 1 77.8 20 2.4 17 1.5 4 54.0 - 0.0 6 24.3 - 0.0 - 0.0 Collecting Seashells 9 25.3 7 38.7 6 17.5 10 21.8 4 36.1 3 40.3 16 3.1 12 1.9 9 10.2 7 4�.2 10 21.8 Wildlife Observation 10 23.5 8 33.9 11 10.1 11 12.8 5 32.5 8 14.2 7 26.1 8 8.7 13 4.3 4 59.9 8 24.1 Saltwater Fishing 11 19.3 11 24.1 5 20.2 9 22.7 9 16.3 7 21.4 12 15.2 5 35.5 10 14.0 13 14.5 8 24.1 Family Gathering 12 16.2 9 28.3 7 16.5 8 25.5 16 6.8 10 12.9 10 19.2 10 3.8 11 10.2 12 15.6 12 17.4 Photography 13 15.2 12 23.2 8 15.3 7 27.2 8 18.3 12 9.2 13 15.0 11 2.6 13 5.5 11 21.8 14 14.4 Hiking 14 13.4 20 11.8 14 3.7 13 7.3 17 5.6 14 7.5 14 8.8 12 2.2 15 1.6 5 53.1 13 15.3 Sunbathing 15 12.4 16 13.3 16 1.7 17 2.4 13 9.5 9 13.1 17 1.9 9 7.5 5 27.8 15 11.0 11 19.2 *Percent of all those in vehicles sampled that participated in activities. ro Table 13. Average Daily On-site Fees and Trip Expenditures Per Person Interviewed Average Expenditures Per Person* On Trip When Interviewed Onsite Fees % Interviewed While preparing While traveling to While visiting site @tate/Site that paid fees for trip and from the site or immediate area Total North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 2.96 31.4 52 69 149 270 Carolina Beach State Park .99 29.1 41 25 91 157 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 10.40 59.8 46 28 99 173 Huntington Beach State Park 3.08 88.7 59 58 155 272 Edisto Beach State Park 6.84 75.2 71 57 82 210 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 7.24 63.7 173 130 57 360 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 8.20 68.8 46 42 14 102 Jekyll Island State Park 4.04 63.8 46 62 89 197 Cumberland Island National Seashore 17.44 77.3 88 102 38 228 Florida - Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 5.28 33.0 68 103 103 274 All Ten Sites 7.30 66.7 71 73 90 234 1 These expenditures are reported in the mailback portion of the survey. They are unweighted for sample response bias and for three sites the sample sizes are too small for statistical reliability; Cape Hatteras National Seashore (20%), Carolina Beach State Park (23%), and Ft. McAllister State Historic Park (112%). Table 14. Maximum Willingness- to-Pay for an Annual Vehicle Pass for the Interview Site Versus Any Site the Agency Manages Interview S4e*($1 Any Site Agency Manages= StafeRe Mean Std Error N Mean Std Error N North Carolina Cape Hatteras 7.37 1.65 40 16-62 3.16 40 Carolina Beach State Park 8.87 3.52 30 6.03 1.57 30 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 9.66 1.80 71 9.46 1.35 71 Huntington Beach State Park 7.82 1.31 90 13.09 1.71 90 Edisto Beach State Park 7.48 1.17 117 11.89 1.59 117 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 2.94 0.89 68 7.99 1.48 68 Ft. McAllister State Historic Site 4.09 2.41 11 5.73 2.61 11 Jekyll Island State Park 5.45 0.83 159 11.75 1.73 159 Cumberland Is. NtI. Seashore 17.52 8.49 118 25.83 8.55 118 Florida - Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 6.38 1.29 97 13.90 2.87 96 AlTenSites 8.30 137 770 13,52 1.46 769 *Pass would admit all persons in the vehicle at the interview site only and is good for one year. "Pass would admit all persons in the vehicle to any site the agency manages and is good for one year. co Table 15. Willingness-to-Pay Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - On-site Survey State/Site Dollars Per Person Per Day (Percent Yes)* 1.00 2.00 5.00 7.50 10-00 12.50 15-00 25.00 50.00 75.00 North Carolina '47.83 12 14.29 6.67 0.00 Cape Hatteras National Seashore JV 45.83 21.74 .50 10.00 Carolina Beach State Park 42.86 43.75 42-86 20.00 13.33 6.67 20.00 6.25 0.00 0.00 South Carolina 0.00 2 44`*@`-:::'::::79.4 5 28.57 28.00 14.81 13-33 Myrtle Beach State Park &:17. 40.74 16-67 0.00 0.00 11.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huntington Beach State Park Edisto Beach State Park :.67.5,7,'.,' 44.44 31.58 30.56 8.33 12-50 16.13 3.23 0.00 4.00 Georgia Skidaway Island'State Park 39-13 30.00 16.67 0.00 7.41 3.70 0.00 0.00 Fort McAllister State Historic Park 18-18 12.50 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Jekyll Island State Park 3@1 28.21 10.81 27.03 10.81 8.11 8.33 0.00 5.41 . .. ........ 6 54 42.8 .0 W6 2.:::::::::,::9 85:14 Cumberland Island National Seashore 94A ..... :.8 @80 ... 6 ."62:50 25-00 0.00 0.00 Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 7.6.9,..::!:: 25.00 23-08 28.57 16.00 30.77 4.35 4.35 0.00 All Ten Sites 48.78 37.15 28.85 13.97 17.70 6.83 2.53 1.99 Toned areas show dollar amounts for which a majority (i.e. 50% or more) of those interviewed responded that they would pay the fee. Table 16. Willing ness-to- Pay for Vehicle Pass to Site: Randomly Assigned Dollar Amounts - Mailback Survey State/Site Dollars Per Year for Vehicle Pass (%Yes) Number of 1.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 25.00 50.00 100.00 Responses North Carolina Cape Hatteras National Seashore 22 Carolina Beach State Park 26 South Carolina ................................... ............................. .... Myrtle Beach State Park !::::::55@56 ::::62@50: 25.00 0.00 46 ............ ............ ............. ................. ........ Huntington Beach State Park 10Q@',0,`:::.61j.1 6.' 18.18 23.08 0.00 14.29 80 .... ....... ..... ...... ...... Edisto Beach State Park .68,42 40-00 6*671:. 42.86 20.00 7.14 109 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 40-00 25.00 6.25 0.00 10.00 61 Ft. McAllister State Historic Park 8 Jekyll Island State Park .8.: 25 9::. 27.27 0.00 4.76 137 . . . ..... 3, 7&' 77.78 12.50 0.00 105 Cumberland Island National Seashore :85, '.6 .2 ........... ....... ........ Florida-Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 44.44 30.77 7.69 6.25 89 ............ ....... ...... 79 All Ten Sites :7 *; U* 1-7 ", 0" ....... V@ 42.70 32.04 7.69 7.79 666 Insufficient number of mailback responses Toned areas show dollar amount for which a majority (i.e. 50% or more) of those interviewed responded that they would buy the pass. 29 Table 17. Satisfaction Ratings on a Scale from 1 to 10 Standard Rating (Percent) State/Site Mean Error N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 North Carolina Cape Hatteras 9.03 0.17 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 Carolina Beach State Park 8.10 0.33 29 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 6.9 6.9 20.7 13.8 17.2 31.0 South Carolina Myrtle Beach State Park 8.57 0.20 61 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 4.9 8.2 21.3 26.2 34.4 Huntington Beach St. Park 8.06 0.21 81 1.2 1.2 0.0 2.5 6.2 3.7 16.0 22.2 19.8 27.2 Edisto Beach State Park 8.24 0.17 109 1.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.5 6.4 9.2 24.8 22.9 28.4 Georgia Skidaway Island State Park 7.68 0.24 59 0.0 1.7 3.4 0.0 6.8 11.9 6.8 39.0 15.3 15.3 Ft. McAllister St. Historic Pk. 7.33 0.91 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 22.2 0.0 33.3 Jekyll Island State Park 7.78 0.15 139 0.0 1.4 2.2 0.7 9.4 5.8 14.4 31.7 15.1 19.4 Cumberland Is. Natl. Seashore 8.81 0.15 103 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 1.9 4.9 4.9 24.3 9.7 51.5 Florida - Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore 8.54 0.13 92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 3.3 15.2 26.1 23.9 29.3 All Ten Sites 8.22 0.66 690 0.4 0.6 1.3 1.2 5.1 5.5 11.6 26.2 18.4 29.7 APPENDIX i A. Site Profiles - NOAA Inventory of Public Recreation Areas and Facilities in Coastal Areas. 31 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: CAPE HATTERAS FATIONAL SEASHORE 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY N MANAGING AGENCY: NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COUNTY ACRES DARE NC 24704 HYDE NC 5615 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3518NO7534W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 25319 5000 30319 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . YES 1982 25319 5000 30319 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1977 25319 5000 30319 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1972 25319 5000 30319 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT'OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 CAPITAL ($) OPERATING $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 # 1984 3430000 3237800 588322 130.3 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # 1982 0 2693600 436207 101.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 # 1977 8000 2400000 574551 100.0 BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 # 1972 2546000 2000000 B 140.0 CAMPSITES CRV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3000 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27319 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422400 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 630 USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1984 1396100 ,FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1982 1698500 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SITES . . . . . . . . 300 1977 1786500 -PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 1972 1565054 MISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH IB= RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION 'C= RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINTSTRATTnN F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE G = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NOT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND-FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: CAROLINA BEACH STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY1 NC PARKS & RECREATION COUNTY ACRES NEW HANOVER 1773 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3402N07753W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 1743 30 1773 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1982 1743 30 1773 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1977 1743 30 1773 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 443 30 473 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 CAPITAL ($) OPERATING ($) $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 0 165540 65328 6.0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 # 1982 15000 148986 58795 5.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 # 1977 0 115878 45729 4.o BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1972 0 99324 39196 3.0 CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT). 83 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH B6s: 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1600 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . 31 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . 0 # DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 162526 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 184287 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SiTiS*. 0 # 1977 147036 RARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 # 1972 105693 VISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RE TRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS ,D= AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND T6 SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE ,E= AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE G = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NOT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/892l NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: MYRTLE BEACH STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: SC PARKS, RECREATION & TOURISM COUNTY ACRES HORRY 312 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3339NO7855W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 312 0 312 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1982 312 0 312 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1977 312 0 312 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 312 0 312 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLA@D: . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 CAPITAL M OPERATING M $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # 1984 0 618117 954135 26 . 0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 24431 503526 789659 25.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B B 555808 20.0 BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPSi 0 # 1972 B B 309474 15.0 CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HLINTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5280 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . 300 USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . 0 DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1984 2030152 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . 0 1982 2009316 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SiTES: . . . . . . . 0 1977 1476738 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 1972 1575300 MISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT_OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NOT FOUND PHONE (301) 443 8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: HUNTINGTON BEACH STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: SC PARKS, RECREATION & TOURISM COUNTY ACRES GEORGETOWN 2500 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3331N07905N TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 2412 88 2500 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1982 2412 88 2500 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1977 2412 88 2500 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 2412 88 2500 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL 0) OPERATING ($) $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 167927 285219 436230 12.5 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 5613 239247 319487 11.5 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B B 183259 9.0 BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1972 B B 90352 7.0 CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 #- RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2300 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10560 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # PICNIC TABLES . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1984 554512 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1982 735752 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SITES . . . . . . . . 0 1977 943152 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 1972 491050 VISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO FETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NCT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: EDISTO BEACH STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: SC PARKS, RECREATION & TOURISM COUNTY ACRES COLLETON 1255 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3302NO8026W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 1255 0 1255 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1982 1255 0 1255 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1977 1255 0 1255 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 1255 0 1255 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 3( 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL ($) OPERATING ($) $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 145571 207680 241021 12.5 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 # 1982 0 176624 197426 10.5 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B B 138776 10.5 BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 # 1972 B B 27775 8.0 CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3960 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . 188 USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . 0 DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1984 223986 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1982 282779 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SiTiS.' 0 1977 506688 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 1972 173418 VISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NO'r FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: SKIDAWAY ISLAND STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: GA PARKS, REC. & HIST. SITES COUNTY ACRES CHATHAM 490 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3156NO8101W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER. TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 490 0 490 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1982 490 a 490 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1977 490 0 490 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1972 490 0 490 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL M OPERATING $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 0 71854 72303 3.0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 0 61175 50666 3.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B B 31470 B BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1972 B B 0 B CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 156933 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 134350 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SITES . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 113252 .PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . # 1972 B VISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFF TI'C OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE Ncr FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: FORT MCALLISTER STATE HISTORIC PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: GA PARKS, REC. 8 HIST. SITES COUNTY ACRES BRYAN 1693 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3153NO8111W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 1693 0 1693 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1982 1693 0 1693 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1977 1693 0 1693 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 1693 0 1693 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL ($) OPERATING ($) $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # 1984 0 70906 28128 5.0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 # 1982 0 73331 18848 5.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B B 5275 B BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPSi 1 # 1972 B B 399 B CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1693 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 60351 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 67597 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SiTiS' 0 # 1977 58576 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . # 1972 B rISSING INFORMATION CODES A= SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B= RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C= RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D= AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E= AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F= SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE G= LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NCT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: JEKYLL ISLAND STATE PARK 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: GA - JEKYLL ISLAND AUTHORITY COUNTY ACRES GLYNN 5800 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3104NO8127W IYPE OF AREA 'ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 5600 200 5800 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . YES 1982 5600 200 5800 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1977 5600 200 5800 ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 1972 5600 200 5800 ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL ($) OPERATING $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # 1984 165000 2637000 2295500 68.0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 # 1982 34800 1970000 1736000 61.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 B 1230000 927200 56.0 BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 # 1972 B 850000 627000 48.0 CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5600 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58080 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 # PICNIC TABLES . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 # DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 # OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 # 1984 1750000 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1982 1487500 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SITES . . . . . . . . 1500 1977 B PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3000 1972 B FISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMEWS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NUT FOUND PHONE (301) 443 _8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: CUMBERLAND ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY MANAGING AGENCY: NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COUNTY ACRES CAMDEN GA 18678 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 3051NO8126W TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING A BODY OF WATER . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUEN6E@ YES 1984 17678 1000 18678 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1982 17678 1000 18678 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1977 B B B ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1972 A A A ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLANr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 CAPITAL ($) OPERATING $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 0 856500 0 28.0 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 0 831400 0 28.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . 6 # 1977 142000 B 0 B BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPSi 2 # 1972 A A A A CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10678 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8000 ACRES BEACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84480 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1984 32400 FIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1982 38400 @PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURA L SiTiS* 0 # 1977 25143 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1972 A MISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH B = RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE G = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NCT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 NOAA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES IN COASTAL AREAS, FY 1984 SITE NAME: GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE 1984 ACREAGE BY COASTAL COUNTY N MANAGING AGENCY: NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COUNTY ACRES ESCAMBIA FL 22861 OKALOOSA FL 3485 LATITUDE - LONGITUDE: 301r.,NO8841W SANTA ROSA , FL 2700 HARRISON MS 19997 JACKSON MS 49870 TYPE OF AREA ACREAGE ADJACENT TO OR INCLUDING.A BODY OF WATER . . . . . . . . . YES LAND WATER TOTAL ADJACENT TO BODIES OF WATER UNDER TIDAL INFLUENCES . . . . YES 1984 12121 86792 98913 ADJACENT TO OPEN OCEAN WATERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1982 9421 86792 96213 OFFSHORE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1977 B B B ON BARRIER ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES 1972 A A A ON OPEN OCEAN ISLAND . . NO ON ESTUARY/EMBAYMENT ISLAhr: NO 0 PERCENT OF THE 1984 ACREAGE IS IN ON UNCLASSIFIED ISLAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO NONCOASTAL COUNTIES. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES BUDGET & PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES REVENUE PERSONNEL ARTIFICIAL REEFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # CAPITAL ($) OPERATING ($) $ (FTE) FISHING PIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 # 1984 0 3012200 483973 108.5 BOAT RAMPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I # 1982 3266000 2510700, 407614 103.0 BOAT SLIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # 1977 816000 B 29640 B BOAT DOCKS (WITHOUT SLIPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 # 1972 A A A A CAMPSITES (RV AND TENT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 # RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH BEDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES HUNTING/GAME MANAGEMENT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ACRES CONSERVATION/SCENIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98913 ACRES BEACH . . . . . ... . . . 540000 LINEAR FT TRAILS . . . . . . . . . 8 MILES OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 # PICNIC TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 # USER DAYS ATTENDANCE GOLF COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 DRIVING RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 OUTDOOR COURTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1984 5803400 JIELD SPORT AREAS . . . . . . . . . . * 1 1982 3507400 PARKING SPACES AT HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SiTiS' 180 1977 2900000 PARKING SPACES AT ALL OTHER SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800 1972 A MISSING INFORMATION CODES A = SITE DID NOT EXIST STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT BRANCH @B= RECORDS NOT KEPT ON THIS DATA ELEMENT OCEAN ASSESSMENTS 'DIVISION C = RECORDS TOO COSTLY TO RETRIEVE OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY AND MARINE ASSESSMENTS D = AGENCY DID NOT RESPOND TO SURVEY NATIONAL OCEA" SERVYr E = AGENCY LOST RECORDS NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION F = SATELITTE PARK - DATA IN OTHER PARK U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 0 = LATITUDE - LONGITUDE NOT FOUND PHONE (301) 443-8843/8921 List of Publications Leeworthy, Vernon R., Norman F. Meade, Paula M. deNobel, and Richard Sacchi, 1987: National Inventory of public outdoor recreation facilities in coastal areas, South Carolina, Volume 1: Rockville, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 8pp. Leeworthy, Vernon R., Norman F. Meade, Paula M. deNobel, and Richard Sacchi, 1987: National Inventory of public outdoor recreation facilities in coastal areas, South Carolina, Volume 11: Appendices. Rockville, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Meade, Norman F., Thomas LaPointe and Robert C. Anderson, 1983: Multivariate analysis of worldwide tanker casualties. In Proceedings: 1983 Oil Spill Conference, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., 6pp. Meade, Norman F. and Vernon R. Leeworthy, 1986: Public expenditures on outdoor recreation in the coastal areas of the USA. Rockville, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 18pp. Ocean Assessments Division, 1983: Assessing the social costs of oil spills: The Amoco Cadiz case study. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 144pp. Strategic Assessment Branch, 1984: Analysis of oil discharges from proposed tankering operation in eastern Gulf of Mexico. Rockville, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 16pp. Strategic Assessment Branch, 1988: National estuarine inventory: Data Atlas, Volume 4, public recreation facilities in coastal areas. Rockville, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 156pp. Yang, Edward J., Roger C. Dower, and Mark Menefee, 1984: The use of economic analysis in valuing natural resource damages, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 154pp. I c i IIIIIIIIIIII @@Illl III i 3 6668 00003 4217 ,