Instream Flows for Recreation: A Handbook on Concepts and Research Methods

Home Browse Search

USER SURVEY -BASED METHODS User survey -based methods involve techniques designed to solicit information from recreationists about flow - related conditions and their evaluations of those conditions. These methods are generally arranged along a continuum from interviews or focus group meetings featuring qualitative evaluations to more systematic, quantitative efforts associated with on -site or off -site surveys. Survey -based methods are critical for exploring evaluations of flows or conditions. No other method provides such a quantifiable form of evaluative information. Users are the experts about factors such as the number of navigation problems that may be acceptable for a given trip, how much challenge or risk they prefer when running whitewater, and where or how they like to camp or fish or swim. Surveys are the means for collecting this information. Output from survey methods can come in a variety of forms, ranging from the descriptive comments about preferable conditions to quantitative evaluations (usually in graphic form) of various conditions or the range of flows that create them. The greater the stakes or controversy, the greater the need to collect information from a statistically valid sample. In the following sections, advantages, disadvantages, and keys to success will be discussed separately for each of the major techniques: interviews /focus group meetings, single or present flow surveys, and flow comparison surveys. Sidebars on "controlled flow assessments" (where users or resource experts evaluate a range of flows on a regulated river) and surveys involving photographic media are also presented, along with short discussions on survey theory (the concept of social norms) and conducting effective surveys. A summary for survey methods in general follows. INTERVIEWS/FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS Interviews or focus group meetings are the most basic of the survey -based methods; they generally provide descriptive or more anecdotal information about the best conditions or flows. They may be conducted on -site, when a purposive sample of users are brought to a river to run various flows and discuss the differences between them, or off -site during the scoping phase of an effort that will mainly rely on professional judgment. The key element that distinguishes interviews and focus groups from other survey -based methods is that information is collected from a smaller number of users and is not quantitatively oriented. Advantages and Disadvantages As a stand -alone method, interviews/ focus groups often have limited rigor. The small sample sizes and lack of quantification means results are less defensible. However, these methods are generally cheap and easy to accomplish, and they can provide a powerful way to improve professional judgment efforts. In addition, in some situations (particularly on shorter river segments where controlled flows allow users to evaluate a full range of flows and conditions, also known as a "controlled flow 38 assessments," see sidebar on page 42), the focus group technique often provides ample information. A focus group also allows identification of and interaction among representatives of key interests (such as boaters and anglers), which is a benefit in itself. Keys to Success Interviews and focus groups work best when they are relatively structured and creating a list of topics and questions to be covered in an interview or meeting is useful. With controlled flow field assessments (see sidebar on page 42), r rigure zi. interviews witn expernencea users can provide useful information, although this approach lacks the rigor of more quantitative survey methods.