NANTICOKE RIVER WATERSHED BOATING ASSESSMENT STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction This report, Nanticoke River Watershed Boating Assessment Study, provides a baseline study of the water body to characterize users and provide insight into attitudes of these users and shoreline residents. The study was a cooperative effort of the University of Delaware Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Chesapeake and Coastal Watershed Service, Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Division of Fish and Wildlife, and the Nanticoke Watershed Alliance. The study sought to understand the magnitude of the various activities occurring on the water and determine the extent to which conflicts or safety problems exist between users, to assess peak-use boating patterns using a Geographic Information System (GIS) data base, to collect attitudinal information from various groups to determine their perceptions of recreational and commercial boating on the river, and to assess the possible impact of recreational boating activity on the natural resources of the watershed. Methods To accurately and completely characterize the resource and the boating activity that was occurring on the river, a number of specific procedures were initiated and completed. These individual tasks were intended to collectively provide a thorough picture of conditions on the river and its tributaries. The data collection procedures were multi-faceted and included an on-site field survey of recreational users (n=100); mail surveys of riparian property owners (n=164), commercial shipping companies (n=7), tug/barge operators (n=17) and commercial watermen (n=3); and aerial flights to count and observe on-water boating activity (n=8). Data collected were analyzed in a number of distinct ways. Initially, frequency distributions for all questions were tabulated separately for each of the survey instruments that were distributed. Where possible, subpopulations of users were identified to compare and examine responses to similarly asked questions. Initially, the on-site survey of boaters and a subpopulation of residents who also boated on the Nanticoke River and tributaries were examined for the variables that they had in common. In addition, both residents and boaters in the field study were asked a few key questions about the environmental conditions of the river and their opinions of preferred management strategies for the river and its tributaries. Boater Profile and Activity Patterns On-site boaters were primarily from the two states bordering the river, Delaware (55%) and Maryland (40%). The majority of these boaters operated powerboats (95%). The average size boat was 18.4 feet with an average engine horsepower of 113 hp. Almost one-half (48%) reported that they carried some type of communications device with them while boating. Of these, 48% carried VHF radios and 43% carried cellular telephones on their boats. Nanticoke River boaters had considerable boating experience. The on-site survey boaters averaged 18.6 years of experience, with more than 34% indicating that they had more than 20 years of experience operating a boat The average number of years operating on the river was 12 years. About 29% of the boaters had more than 20 years' experience, and approximately 55% of the boaters had less than 10 years navigating the river. The majority of the on-site boaters rated their boating skill level as either intermediate (39%) or advanced (41%). Thirty-seven percent of them indicated that they had taken a boater safety education course. Fifty-nine percent of those responding to the landowner survey indicated that they boated on the Nanticoke River and its tributaries. Forty percent of these boaters owned one boat, and 50% owned two or more boats. Sixty-seven percent of the boats owned by the respondents were powerboats (either inboard or outboard), and 16% were non-powered rowboats, canoes, or kayaks. The average length of the boat they used most often was 19.9 feet with an average engine horsepower of 122 hp. More than one-half (52%) of the landowner boaters carry some type of marine communication device with them while they boat, with the majority carrying a VHF radio (54%), followed by cellular phones (37%). Landowning boaters had an average of 30.5 years of boating experience, with 65% indicating they had more than 20 years of boating experience. Sixty-four percent of the respondents rated themselves as either advanced or expert boaters. Forty-seven percent indicated that they had taken a boater safety education course. The average number of days boating for on-site boaters in 1995 was 19.8 days. The largest percentage of on-site boaters boated between 5 and 10 days (33%), followed by those who boated fewer than 5 days (22%) (70% of this group of boaters indicated they did not boat on the river in 1995). A similar number boated between 11 and 20 days (20%). Eight percent of the on-site boaters indicated that they boated on the river 50 days or more the previous year. Landowner boaters, on average, reported greater boating participation than on-site boaters. They responded that they boated an average of 34.8 days in 1995. Of this total, 23% boated between 5 and 10 days, and 18% boated fewer than 5 days, (with 53% of these boaters indicating no days of boating in 1995). Thirty percent of landowner boaters indicated they boated more than 30 days in 1995, compared with only 16% of on-site boaters. Nanticoke River boaters are primarily warm-weather boaters, according to those who were interviewed during the on-site field survey. The majority of the recreational boating activity occurs between June 1 and September 30. July and August are peak months, with 96% of boaters indicating they boat on the river in these months. Use remains high during September, with 84% reporting participation, but drops off noticeably in October (57%) and further in November (25%). Of all the boating activities that boaters could engage in while on the Nanticoke River and its tributaries, fishing (51%) was the activity that was mentioned most often by on-site boaters. Cruising (34%) was the next most popular boating activity on the river, followed by waterskiing/tubing (16%) and sightseeing (16%). Six percent of the respondents indicated they also swam from their boats in the river. GIS Analysis The GIS phase of the study focuses on map data generated from the eight aerial flights conducted during the 1996 boating season. All of the data collected from each flight were aggregated into one GIS map. The intent of aggregating the aerial observation data was to depict recreational boating activity throughout the summer months and not just for a single day. By aggregating the data, areas of the river that were used most often by certain groups of boaters could be readily identified. The total observations for the eight aerial flights were relatively light. They averaged 96 sightings per day, with a range of 47 to 160. The Delaware Nanticoke- Broad Creek area had the highest number of total activity sightings (n=245), followed closely by the southern-most section of the river, at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay, with 244 activity sightings. These two river segments accounted for 64% of the total activity observed over the eight days of aerial flights. The Marshyhope Creek accounted for another 18% of the total activity, the Maryland-Upper area accounted for 13% and only 5% of the total boating activity was observed in the Maryland-Middle area. The recreational use patterns examined in this spatial analysis include fishing, cruising, waterskiing, jetskiing, swimming, sightseeing, sailing, crabbing, sailboarding, and canoeing/kayaking. Fishing was the predominant activity observed during the aerial flights, comprising 42% of the total sightings. Fishing was the top-rated activity on six of the eight aerial flight days. This was followed by cruising boats (25%) and waterskiing (13%). Waterskiing (and tubing behind boats) represented 13% of all the activity observed. Jetskiing (5%), swimming from boats (4%), sightseeing (3%), sailing (3%), crabbing (2%), canoeing/kayaking (2%) and sailboarding (<1%) represented the remainder of activities that were observed through this phase of the study. Boating Quality Boaters primarily use the Nanticoke River and its tributaries to participate in specific recreational activities with their watercraft. However, there are other attributes that also make the water body an attractive resource to enjoy. Overall, the reason that received the highest response rate by on-site boaters was its peaceful location (80%). This was followed closely by the scenic quality of the river and its tributaries (75%), adequate water depth (74%), close to their home or where they were staying (73%), and there were adequate channel markers on the river (71%). The lowest rated reason for boating on the Nanticoke River, according to on-site boaters, was good swimming (32%). Landowning boaters' top choices for boating on the river included opportunities to observe wildlife (79%), there was not a lot of other boating (76%) and the river's wide channel (69%). The reasons least likely to influence boating on the river included adequate channel markers (16%) and adequate water depth (24%). On-site boaters rated boating conditions on the river the day they boated. A five-point scale was used, with 1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree. Three statements received fairly strong agreement from respondents in the field. They included I throughly enjoyed my boat trip today (4.38 mean response rating and 96% agreed or strongly agreed); boating conditions on the river and its tributaries were safe (4.08 mean response rating and 89% agreed or strongly agreed); and there are adequate law enforcement patrols on the river and its tributaries (3.41 mean response rating and 58% agreed or strongly agreed). The statements that boaters tended to disagree with were those that pointed towards negative behavior by boaters on the water or unsafe boating conditions. These included I nearly had an accident on the river because of crowded conditions (1.55 mean response rating and 1% agreed or strongly agreed); commercial boat traffic created conditions that were hazardous (1.65 mean response rating and 0% agreed or strongly agreed); the behavior of other boaters interfered with the quality of my boating experience (1.80 mean response rating and 9% agreed or strongly agreed); and the noise of other boats reduced my enjoyment on the river and its tributaries (1.87 mean response rating and 0% agreed or strongly agreed). Boaters were also asked to rate the quality of their overall boating trip on the day they were interviewed using a 10-point scale, with a rating of 10 signifying a perfect trip. The mean response rating for all on-site boaters was 8.3, with 83% of respondents rating the day's boating experience a level of 8 or greater. Crowding Oftentimes, crowded boating conditions may lead to boater conflicts and possibly accidents. With this in mind, on-site boaters were asked to rate the crowding levels on the river the day they were interviewed using a 9-point scale, with 1=not at all crowded and 9=extremely crowded. Fifty percent of the responding boaters indicated the lowest level of crowding (1), and no boaters indicated the highest (9). The mean crowding level was 2.4 on the 9-point scale. When landowning boaters rated their perceptions of crowding using the same 9-point scale, they rated the river on average 3.23. Sixty-five percent of the respondents rated the crowding low (between 1 and 3); 22% rated it medium (between 4 and 6), and 13% rated the crowding high (between 7 and 9). It is important to note that residents were asked to describe the level of crowding throughout the boating season compared to on-site boaters who were asked to provide their daily impression of conditions. This may, in part, explain the higher average rating for landowners (3.2) than for on-site boaters (2.4). Boating Impacts Thirty-eight percent of property owners reported heavy (9%) or moderate (29%) recreational traffic along the river. Forty-four percent indicated they felt the recreational traffic was light, and 19% had no opinion. Property owners also indicated whether recreational boating contributed to any of a series of negative factors on or near their property. They were most likely to respond that boaters always or sometimes caused pollution and litter in the river (38%), shoreline erosion (36%), disturbance to wildlife (32%), and safety hazards on the river (32%). They indicated recreational boaters were least likely to cause damage to docks and piers (18%). Commercial Shipping When asked to describe the level of commercial traffic (barges, tugs, etc.) on the river, only 17% of property owners surveyed indicated that they felt it was heavy or moderate. Fifty-eight percent indicated they felt it was light, while another 25% had no opinion on the level of commercial traffic. Property owners were provided a list of negative factors that may be caused by commercial shipping traffic along the river and near their property and asked to indicate whether commercial activity always, sometimes, seldom, or never contributes to the factors identified. They also had the option of indicating no opinion, if they were unsure of the effect of shipping on a certain factor. Shoreline erosion (21%) was the factor that property owners most often felt was always or sometimes caused by commercial shipping activity. Water turbulence was the next most highly rated factor; 10% of the owners indicated that it was always or sometimes caused by shipping traffic. Invasion of privacy (2%) and uncomfortable noise levels (3%) were rarely attributed to shipping traffic according to property owners. Environmental Concerns When asked to rate the overall environmental quality of the river and its tributaries over the past 10 years, or since they have been visiting the river, 24% of on-site boaters felt that it was improving, 16% indicated they felt it was deteriorating and 60% felt that it was not changing very much or were not sure. When the boaters were asked to rate the conditions of the living resources (e.g., fish, crabs, clams) in the river, one-quarter felt they were improving, 28% reported they felt they were deteriorating and 47% felt they were not changing very much or were not sure of the condition of the resources. Twenty percent of landowners felt that the environmental quality was improving, 12% indicated they felt it was deteriorating, and 68% felt that it was not changing very much or were unsure. When owners were asked to rate the conditions of the living resources in the river, 12% felt they were improving, 40% reported they felt they were deteriorating, and 48% felt they were not changing very much or were not sure of the condition of the resources. On-site and landowner boaters were given the opportunity to rate the level of pollution along the river on a 9-point scale, ranging from 1=not at all polluted to 9=extremely polluted. Overall, the mean pollution rating for the river, as perceived by on-site boaters, was 3.45. One-fourth of these boaters (27%) felt the river was not at all polluted (scale values of 1 or 2), while the majority (52%) considered it slightly polluted (values of 3 or 4). Only 21% gave pollution ratings above 4 on the 9-point scale, and just 3% reported values of 8 or 9, corresponding to an evaluation of extremely polluted. The average rating for landowner boaters was 3.86. Forty-eight percent rated the pollution level low (between 1 and 3), 45% rated it medium (between 4 and 6), and 7% rated river pollution high (between 7 and 9). User Conflicts When on-site boaters were asked if they felt there were any conflicts between users of the river, 26% indicated they felt there were conflicts. However, only 3% of responding boaters reported that they had observed any boating accidents within the last year which were due to conflicts between users. All landowners were asked if they felt there were any conflicts. Twenty-two percent reported that they felt there were conflicts. Like the on-site boaters, only 3% of property owners had observed any boating accidents within the last year due to conflicting uses on the river. Twenty-seven percent of tug/barge operators responded that they encountered conflicts with recreational vessels (e.g., close calls, near accidents, or other navigation problems) within the past year. However, only 14% indicated that they had observed a boating accident within the last year which was a result of conflicts between users. Management Considerations A series of management options were presented both to boaters interviewed in the field, and to landowners through the mail survey. With no surprise, the management option that gained nearly complete support from on-site boaters was prohibiting all discharges of pollutants into the water; 96% of all respondents favored this option. Eighty-four percent of landowning boaters favored this option, and 74% of non-boaters supported it, making it the most favored option by both groups of landowners. Other management options that received considerable support from on-site boaters and dealt with protecting the river's resources included establishing off-limit zones to protect sensitive resources (74%), restrictions on building and development (66%), and restricting boat use in shallow waters to prevent scouring and resource degradation (63%). These same options had considerably less appeal to landowners. Forty-eight percent of non-boaters favored off-limit zones, and only 38% of landowning boaters favored this option. Restrictions on building and development were fairly close for both segments of landowners (52% for boaters and 44% for non-boaters) but still less than the support noted by the on-site group of boaters. Non-boaters (54%) were closer to on-site boaters in their support for restricting boating in shallow waters than they were to landowning boaters (37%). Both boating groups (82% of on-site boaters and 72% of landowning boaters) overwhelmingly opposed limiting the number of boats using the river. A majority of non-boaters (51%) also opposed this measure. There was very little support for this option from any of the responding groups. There was also major opposition to limiting the size and power of boats using the river from both boating groups (77% of on-site boaters and 69% of landowning boaters). Non-boaters (40%) favored this measure considerably more than the boating groups. Zoning the river to provide for specific uses in designated places received limited support from on-site boaters (39%) and considerably less support from landowners (22% of boaters and 27% of non-boaters). A majority of both boating groups opposed this option (57% of on-site boaters and 67% of landowning boaters). The option of placing stricter limits on harvesting fish, crabs, and clams, etc. consistently received the lowest level of support from each responding group (34% of on-site boaters, 31% of landowning boaters, and 39% of non-boaters). Again, it is noteworthy that a majority of both boating groups (51% for each group) opposed this option. Finally, 43% of the responding shipping firm representatives suggested certain changes along the river. These suggestions included enforcing no-wake zones near commercial loading areas and regulations that would give a high priority to commercial shippers' use of the river. Seventy-one percent of the tug and barge operators also suggested specific changes they would like to see along the Nanticoke River. These suggestions included such things as additional dredging at certain locations; better buoy markers, especially lighted markers and buoys that can withstand ice conditions on the river; and warning signs to alert small-boat owners of the commercial shipping traffic that navigates the river.