A COMPARISON OF RECREATION CONFLICT FACTORS FOR DIFFEREENT WATER-BASED RECREATION ACTIVITIES

 

Recreation Conflicts And Compatibility Between Motorboat Owners, Personal Watercraft Owners, And Coastal Landowners Along New York’s Great Lakes Coast

July 1, 2000

Cheng-Ping Wang

Graduate student, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 211 Marshall Hall, One Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY 13210

 

Chad P. Dawson

Professor, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 211 Marshall Hall, One Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY 13210

Introduction

The popularity of personal watercraft has stirred controversy both for and against their use in state and National Parks, as well as across many waterways and lakes of the United States. How you view personal watercraft use and operator behavior depends, in part, on whether you own and operate a personal watercraft or not. Both recreation conflict and compatibility have been reported between personal watercraft users, motorboaters, and landowners in a variety of circumstances. Some of the recreation conflicts arise from personal watercraft users interfering with the experience of motorboaters by speeding, jumping their boat wakes, or crossing their boating path. Reportedly personal watercraft users interfere with coastal landowners because of the noise of the personal watercraft, potential safety problems near other recreational users, and some privacy issues of landowners.

Recreation conflict is defined as interference to a user, who is trying to achieve a goal in a recreation activity, and the interference is due to another recreational user’s behavior (Jacob and Schreyer 1980). Such recreation conflicts involve several major components: the user’s motivations or goals in engaging in a recreation activity, the user’s activity style, resource dependence by the user, the mode or means of experience, the lifestyle tolerance of other users, and the user’s sensitivity to conflict. These conflict components were verified by numerous research studies across different user groups and recreation activities, as well as the study reported here (see Wang and Dawson 2000).

Previous studies identified the potential conflict groups as specific activity participants, and did not mention that people engaging in single or multiple activities may have different patterns or different values for the components of recreation conflict. For example, researchers pointed out recreation conflict between motorboating and nonmotorboating users, but users with both experiences may have different recreation conflict sensitivity levels from those with only one type of recreation use experience. Furthermore, users with both motorboating and nonmotorboating experiences may react differently when participating in motorboating and nonmotorboating activities. Personal watercraft users are newer users in the New York Great Lakes in comparison to the traditional users, such as motorboaters and coastal landowners. The potential for interference between personal watercraft owners, motorboats and landowners was studied to compare the conflict factors among the different users and across groups with different activity combinations, such as landowners who owned a personal watercraft.

 

Methods

New York’s Great Lakes (NYGL) in this study included the U.S. side of the St. Lawrence River, Lake Ontario, Niagara River, and Lake Erie. Compared to many inland bodies of water in New York State, NYGL have a larger water surface area and less public access overall. However, the potential recreation conflict problems usually do not happen in the middle of a lake, but in the coastal areas with public access, such as in bays, harbors, or near public beaches.

This study involves three major user groups along NYGL: personal watercraft owners, motorboat owners, and landowners with residential property on the shoreline. In order to get a sufficient sample size for each user and combination or users (e.g., landowners who own a motorboat), personal watercraft owners (n=1000) and motorboat owners (n=3000) were selected systematically from the New York State watercraft registrations in the 10 coastal counties along the NYGL including: Jefferson, St. Lawrence, Oswego, Wayne, Monroe, Niagara, Orleans, Erie, Chautauqua, and Cayuga counties. Landowners with residential property (primary or secondary residences) on the NYGL shoreline were selected (n=634 and about 100 for each site) from the tax maps of six study sites including: Alexandria Bay, Sandy Pond, Sodus Bay, Olcott, Niagara River, and Hanford Bay. These six sites were selected because of their access to the Great Lakes and the significant use for boating, personal watercraft use, other water-based recreation activities, and the number of landowners with residential property on the shoreline. Using ax maps this study selected only those owners with residences (primary and secondary) adjacent to the NYGL, but omitted those with vacant lands.

Three mail surveys with parallel questions were designed for personal watercraft owners (PWC), motorboat owners, and coastal landowners to measure the recreation conflict components and compatibility among users with various activity combinations. Each of the three mail surveys was designed from the research literature around nine reported dimensions of recreation conflict and measured by multiple questions. The surveys to users asked about their: recreation motives (19 questions), recreation activity style (11 questions), resource specificity for their recreation activity (10 questions), lifestyle tolerance (30 questions), mode of recreation experience (8 questions), norms for distance from other recreational users (8 questions), problems from personal watercraft users and motorboaters (20 questions), sensitivity to recreation conflict (13 questions), and visitor values for recreation activities (13 questions). In addition, any actual recreation conflict perceived by the survey respondents was measured by an open-end question that asked respondents to describe the interference they had experienced while recreating in NYGL during the past year.

An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the data using orthogonal varimax rotation to reduce the 132 questions down to meaningful factors to more concisely describe the results. To reduce the number of user groups within each survey, ANOVA with Least Significant Distance was conducted to combine the similar groups together. The analysis standards and procedures to establish the factors and the 8 unique activity groups were reported in Wang and Dawson (2000). The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS version 10.0 for windows) was used to conduct this analysis.

 

Study Results

A total of 4,641 surveys were sent out to the three study groups in the early fall of 1999. After two follow up reminder mailings, an overall adjusted response rate of 42% was achieved (personal watercraft owners = 33%, motorboat owners = 41% and landowners = 63%). Respondents were asked to report their ownership of motorboats, jet skis, and coastal lands adjacent to the NYGL. Because each of the three surveys had four possible ownership combinations, the three surveys produced a total of 12 types of owner group combinations (e.g., landowners with personal watercraft and a motorboat). To reduce the number of groups, a statistical analysis was conducted within each type of survey to combine the similar groups together based on the 132 questions in the survey. Motorboat owners with a PWC and land and motorboat owners with a PWC were grouped together because they only differed in 9 of the 132 items. In addition, PWC owners with a motorboat and land, PWC owners with a motorboat and PWC owners with land were combined into the same group because they had less than 15 items different of the 132 questions. Landowners with a motorboat and a PWC were similar to landowners with PWC because only 4 of the 132 items differed. Therefore, the 12 potential ownership groups were reduced to 8 ownership groups with similar responses (Table 1).

Please note that the results from similar ownership groups in the three different surveys can not be added together since each survey was designed from the perspective of owning either a motorboat, PWC, or coastal land. Thus, the PWC-m-l group is different from the L-m-pwc group because the first group answered the PWC survey and the second group answered the Landowner survey. In an effort to make it clear which survey a ownership group completed, capital letters on the group abbreviation will denote the type of mail survey for those respondents. For example, PWC-m-l denotes a Personal Water Craft survey respondent who also owns a motorboat and/or coastal land along NYGL’s.

 

Table 1. Group ownershipa combinations based on results from NYGL mail survey respondents b.

Group Combination

Group Symbol

Respondent Group Size (n)

Motorboat Owner Survey

 

 

Motorboater with pwc and/or land

M-pwc-l

49

Motorboater with land only

M-l

244

Motorboater only

M

694

PWC Owner Survey

 

 

PWC with motorboater and/or land

PWC-l-m

204

PWC only

PWC

82

Landowner Survey

 

 

Landowner with pwc and/or motorboat

L-m-pwc

49

Landowner with motorboat only

L-m

189

Landowner only

L

76

 a Ownership groups include: Landowners = L; Personal Water Craft owners = PWC; Motorboat owners = M.

 b Capital letters denote the type of mail survey for those respondents.

 

Recreational Motivations of Users

In the analysis, two of the 19 motive questions were eliminated because of their low statistical reliability, and the remaining 17 questions were grouped into five factors including: Nature Enjoyment, Relax, Rest & Get Away, Social Interaction, Excitement & Exercise, and Skill & Equipment (Table 2). All ownership groups, especially landowners, reported that they enjoyed the NYGL’s natural setting and the chance to relax, rest & get away. Social Interaction was moderately important for all groups. Landowners liked to get their family together or make friends with their neighbors or visitors; PWC owners and motorboat owners liked to see others and be seen during their boating. Although Excitement & Exercise and Skill & Equipment were not important for all groups, PWC owners enjoyed the excitement more and focused on their skill more than the other groups. Landowners had low interest in Skill & Equipment, probably because they did not report owning a motorboat or PWC.

 

Table 2. Recreation motives and average importance a by responding ownership groups in the NYGL surveys.

 

Group

PWC Owner

Motorboat Owner

Landowner

Motives

PWC-l-m

PWC

M-pwc-l

M-l

M

L-m-pwc

L-m

L

Nature Enjoyment

To see the scenic beauty;

To be outdoors;

To be in natural surroundings

 

3.6

 

 

3.5

 

 

3.8

 

 

3.7

 

 

3.6

 

 

4.3

 

 

4.3

 

 

4.2

 

Relax, Rest & Get Away

For relaxation and rest;

To experience peace and quiet;

To get away from job stress;

To get away from daily routines;

To get away from others

 

 

3.0

 

 

 

3.0

 

 

 

3.4

 

 

 

3.2

 

 

 

3.2

 

 

3.7

 

 

 

3.6

 

 

 

3.3

 

Social Interaction

To be with my family;

To meet new people like myself;

To be with people who have similar values; To be with friends

 

2.7

 

 

2.8

 

 

3.0

 

 

2.9

 

 

2.8

 

 

3.6

 

 

3.0

 

 

2.8

 

Excitement & Exercise

For excitement;

For exercise

2.6

3.0

1.6

1.6

1.6

2.8

2.1

2.1

Skill & Equipment

To improve my boating skills;

To teach my skills to others;

To test my equipment

 

2.2

 

 

2.3

 

 

1.9

 

 

2.1

 

 

2.2

 

 

1.9

 

 

1.7

 

 

0.2

 

a The number shown in the table is the mean value of importance for the motives from 0 = not important to 5 = very important.

 

Activity Style

The style used by the recreational users in engaging in their activity was measured by respondent reactions to 11 statements, printed in the survey, and based on a scale from strongly disagree (-2) to neutral point (0) to strongly agree (2). Two of the 11 statements were dropped because of their low statistical reliability and the remaining 9 statements produced two factors, Self-identity (e.g., do PWC users identify with other PWC users?) and Value Sharing (e.g., what values do PWC users share with other PWC users) (Table 3). Landowners somewhat identified themselves with other landowners. PWC owners without other ownerships more identified themselves as PWC owners than those PWC owners with a motorboat or land. However, landowners without boats or PWC’s identified themselves as landowners less than those with a motorboat or a jet ski. PWC owners disagree with the Value Sharing concept; however, motorboat owners and landowners somewhat share their values with other motorboat owners and landowners respectively.

Comparing the activity style factors within ownership groups, it was found that PWC owners identified with other PWC owners but reportedly didn’t strongly share values with other PWC owners. On the other hand, landowners strongly identified with other landowners and they also reported that they shared common values with other landowners. Motorboat owners identified with other motorboat owners and they also reported that they shared common values with other motorboat owners.

 

Table 3. Activity style dimension and average response a to statements by responding ownership groups in the NYGL surveys.

 

Group

PWC Owner

Motorboat Owner

Landowner

Activity Style

PWC-m-l

PWC

M-pwc-l

M-l

M

L-m-pwc

L-m

L

Self-identity

I am proud to be a PWC owner, motorboat owner, or landowner.

I often describe my self to others by saying, “I am a PWC owner, motorboat owner, or landowner.”

I am glad I chose to participate in PWC use, motorboating, or landownership rather than another activity.

I become irritated when I hear others criticize PWC use, motorboating, or landownership.

I talk up PWC use, motorboating, or landownership to my friends as a great activity.

 

 

 

0.4

 

 

 

 

 

0.9

 

 

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

 

 

 

1.0

 

 

 

 

 

0.8

 

 

 

 

 

0.6

 

 

Value sharing

The PWC owner, motorboat owner, or landowner image in the community represents me well.

I find that my values and the values of other PWC owners, motorboat owners, or landowners are very similar.

I find it is easy to identify my self with other PWC owners, motorboat owners, or landowners.

I have a lot in common with other PWC owners, motorboat owners, or landowners on the coast of NYGLs.

 

 

-0.3

 

 

 

-0.2

 

 

 

0.4

 

 

 

0.3

 

 

 

0.3

 

 

 

0.7

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

 

0.5

 

a The number shown in the table is the mean value of agreement with the statement, from –2=strongly disagree to 2=strongly agree.

 

Resource Specificity

Respondents were asked to evaluate how strongly they agreed or disagreed with 11 questions to measure their specific need for or use of a resource. Analysis of the 11 specific resource need questions produced two factors: Best Place and Place Dependence (Table 4). Although most respondents did not strongly agree that the NYGL was the best place for water-based recreation, landowners more often agreed it was the best place compared to motorboat and PWC owners. PWC owners and motorboat owners probably realized that, due to their mobility, they had the option to use other areas to enjoy their recreational activities. The factor Place Dependence indicated all owners were somewhat dependent on the NYGL area for their experiences, especially landowners. Generally, landowners depended more on the NYGL area because of their properties, whereas motorboat and PWC owners could more easily alternate their activities to other bodies of water.

Table 4. Resource specification and average response a to statements by responding ownership groups in the NYGL surveys.

 

Group

PWC Owner

Motorboat Owner

Landowner

Factor

PWC-m-l

PWC

M-pwc-l

M-l

M

L-m-pwc

L-m

L

Best Place

No other places can be compared with that area.

Being there makes me more satisfied than visiting any other places.

I would not substitute this place with any other place for PWC use, motorboating, or landownership.

 

0.3

 

 

 

0.0

 

 

 

0.4

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

 

0.1

 

 

 

0.8

 

 

 

0.7

 

 

 

0.5

 

 

Place Dependence

The area means a lot to me.

I identify strongly with the area.

I feel attached to the area.

Much of my life centers on this area.

New York’s Great Lakes is my favorite place in my time off.

Being on New York’s Great Lakes is very important to me.

When I use my PWC, motorboat, or own land there I can really be myself.

Being there is one of the most pleasant things I can think of.

 

 

 

1.0

 

 

 

 

 

0.7

 

 

 

 

 

0.9

 

 

 

 

 

1.1

 

 

 

 

 

0.7

 

 

 

 

 

1.3

 

 

 

 

 

1.3

 

 

 

 

 

1.1

 

 

a The number shown in the table is the mean value of agreement with the statement, from –2=strongly disagree to 2=strongly agree.

 

Lifestyle Tolerance

Respondents were asked to evaluate their own group and the other two ownership groups to measure their tolerance of the lifestyle of others. One of the 10 questions was eliminated because of its low statistical reliability. The remaining 9 questions statistically aggregated into one factor for each survey (Table 5). In the evaluation for PWC, all owners with PWC’s evaluated PWC owners as