By Granados, A*, C. Beirne, S. Kearney, C. Sun, C. Hughes, S. Marion, A. Loosen, A. Hubbs, D. Farr, M. Fennell, M. Procko, M. Percy, J. Paczkowski, K. Hoffman, R. Kohlhardt, J. Whittington, B. Curry, and A.C. Burton*

*Corresponding authors: alysgranados@gmail.com, cole.burton@ubc.ca

Caption: Joffre Lakes Provincial Park in British Columbia, Canada, one of the Provincial Parks included of our case studies.

This Plain Language Summary is published in advance of the paper discussed. Please check back soon for a link to the full paper.

People are increasingly spending time in nature, for example, visiting parks. But there’s a lack of information about visitor numbers to parks in North America. This limits our understanding of how the growing popularity of outdoor recreation affects wildlife as well as other people who recreate in the parks. Unsustainable visitor levels could negatively affect wildlife and people. For example, animals might be displaced from hiking trails and people could trample sensitive vegetation or litter, etc. Also, if visitor numbers exceed some threshold, there might not be enough infrastructure, like washrooms or trash bins, to support them.

Different research tools like camera traps, trail counters, day passes/permits for park entry, and online platforms like Strava and AllTrails are some of the methods researchers use to measure visitation to parks. However, we don’t know how the tools compare or the extent to which they provide complementary information about how people spend time in protected areas.

Through two case studies, we compared visitation within and between four provincial parks in Western Canada. We measured visitor numbers with camera traps, trail counters, day passes, AllTrails, and Strava. We found the strengths and weaknesses of tools varied, and that a combination of tools might be best suited to measure recreation activity within parks on a weekly, daily, or monthly basis. We also found that for between-park comparisons, the complexity of the trail system affected how well estimates from tools corresponded.

Basic data about how people use parks is crucial as it can be used to predict future trends, allowing managers to take action to prevent negative ecological impacts while improving visitor experience. Our study highlights the need for the careful selection of research tools to use when aiming to assess how human presence is affecting wildlife as well as other visitors in parks.