1THE SOCIAL GEOGRAPHY OF SOUTHERN WYOMING Important Places, Development, and Natural Resource Management Authors: Amy Pocewicz 1, Russell Schnitzer 1, and Max NielsenPincus 21 The Nature Conservancy, Wyoming Chapter; 2 Institute for a Sustainable Environment, University of Oregon Photo: Ken Driese In Wyoming, we know where to find natural resources. We can follow pronghorns, elk and deer on their seasonal migrations. But we have not had the same information about which places people care about and why. We created social maps for 3 counties (see pages 8-14) and describe that process in this report. People agreed on important places and where development should occur – a collective social vision – highlighting the value of expanding social mapping to other counties or statewide. Social maps could be used to inform local planning, such as comprehensive plans, siting new development, and prioritizing locations for future recreation, conservation, and water projects. SOCIAL MAPS KEY SURVEY FINDINGS We surveyed residents of Albany, Carbon, and Sweewater counties in 2010. Most participants reported that fish and wildlife habitat, availability of water, and open spaces and scenic views are extremely or very important to them. Water is very important to people for agriculture and recreation. Most participants were very concerned about the possibility of future drought, but very few participants felt that their communities are prepared for future droughts. Many participants perceive that wind energy development may enhance the economic sustainability of family farms and ranches, but there was some concern about the potential negative effects of wind developments on wildlife populations and access to some lands for recreation. WHY WE NEED MAPS OF PLACES IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE Wyoming and other western states are challenged with balancing growing demands for energy and residential development with the protection of wildlife habitat, water, open spaces, and working farms and ranches. To achieve this balance, planners and decision-makers must consider a wide variety of data and perspectives and engage diverse stakeholders. For decisions about land uses in specific places, maps are powerful tools and are widely available to represent features such as wildlife populations and energy resources. We created maps of places important to people in southern Wyoming for recreation, agriculture, wildlife and other reasons and maps of preferences for wher new energy and residential development should occur. This was accomplished through a mapping survey that also included questions about values and knowledge, as well as perceptions related to water issues and wind energy development. The resulting maps link impor- tant social values to actionable places, engaged local residents in planning for the future, and provide a collective vision of which places are most important. Social maps provide new information about the values and needs of residents that can contribute to local planning and inform decision-making related to balancing development with land and water protec- tion. We demonstrate in this report how social maps can be used to plan for and make decisions related to land use, through examples related to wind energy development siting and water management. Maps link social values to actionable places However, maps showing places that are important to people and where they would prefer new development to occur do not exist. Social maps provide graphical insight into community perceptions and values and provide concrete locations with which to verify general social perceptions and trends. Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain 0 10 205 Miles Land Management Highways Rivers Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Reclamation Fish and Wildlife Service Forest Service State Private SweetwaterCounty CarbonCounty AlbanyCounty WYOMING THE SOUTHERN WYOMING STUDY AREA The survey was completed in Albany, Carbon, and Sweetwater counties in southern Wyoming. This area was chosen because of ongoing and anticipated changes related to energy development. 2 3MAPPING SURVEY We collected data using an internet-based survey and provided the option to complete a paper survey, to avoid excluding people without convenient internet access. The survey included a mapping exercise, followed by a series of questions assessing knowledge about and perceived importance of the attributes mapped, demographic information, and perceptions related to water issues and wind energy development. The survey was administered by The Nature Conservancy’s Wyoming Chapter, in cooperation with the William D. Ruckelshaus Institute of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Wyoming. For the mapping exercise, participants were asked to place map markers for 16 different attributes that represented important places, development preferences and knowledge of natural resource conditions. The internet-based survey used the GoogleMaps/Earth application programming interface and allowed participants to zoom and pan and view the maps in multiple views (e.g., terrain, map, satellite). The website was created by the Center for Spatial Important places for:agriculture, recreation, wildlife habitat protection, water, open space, and economic opportunities Preferences for development:where new wind energy, oil/gas,and residential development arepreferred Knowledge of conditions:water quality & abundance,land condition, and wildlifeabundance Attributes included in the mapping survey Information at Central Washington University. The survey can be viewed at http://www.wyomingvalues.us (access code 101-0101). Participants could drag and drop as many map markers as desired for each attribute. The paper maps displayed terrain, land tenure, major roads, streams and rivers, and towns. Participants were provided with a labeled sticker sheet with six stickers available per attribute and six extra stickers to use for any attribute. Sticker locations were digitized into GIS files. We mailed invitation letters to 2000 randomly- selected residents in late March 2010. Numbers of invitations were distributed equally among the three counties and were proportional to population levels within each census tract. The invitation included the internet address for the survey and a unique access code. A postage-paid return postcard was enclosed, providing the options to request a paper version of the survey or to decline participation entirely. Multiple reminders were mailed to those who did not respond. Photo: Russell Schnitzer 4SURVEY PARTICIPATION Approximately 10% of 1961 deliverable surveys were completed, with similar response rates among the three counties. 75% of participants lived in one of four major towns – Green River, Laramie, Rawlins, or Rock Springs – which is consistent with population distribution. 81% lived in a town, 12% within five miles of a town, and 8% more than five miles from a town. The mapping activity was completed by 198 people, 98 via the internet and 100 via paper. The additional survey questions were completed by 191 people, 85 via the internet and 106 via paper. To identify reasons for lack of participation and possible response bias, we completed a phone survey of non-participants and compared participant demographics to census and other datasets. Of 45 people who were invited but did not participate, most did not participate for reasons unrelated to the survey content (64%). For example, they did not remember receiving the survey, thought it was junk mail, or did not have time. The other 36% provided reasons related to survey content, including not feeling knowledgeable enough (20%), not understanding the survey (13%) and perceiving a conflict of interest related to their employment (2%). Lack of convenient internet access was an issue for 15% of those who completed the entire phone survey (n=34), and another 6% (2 of 34) reported that the two groups leading the survey affected their decision. Men completed the survey at a higher proportion than their representation in the survey sample(Table 1). Participants had lived in their current county fewer years on average than non- participants. There was no difference in age, employment status, or in the proportion of people with a high school degree; however, a greater proportion of survey participants had a 4-yr college degree (Table 1). An employment rate of 67% was reported by partici- pants, the same proportion reported by the census for the counties studied. The remaining participants were retired (26%), students (3%), homemakers (2%), and unemployed (2%). Characteristic Participants Non-participants Are the two groups different? a Female 31%, n=191 44%, n=1796 Yes (χ2, p< 0.01) Male 69%, n=191 56%, n=1796 Yes (χ2, p< 0.01) Average age 53(1.0b), n=189 54(0.8b), n=432 No (t-test, p=0.50) High school degree 98%, n=191 94%, n=34 No (Fisher, p=0.17) 4-yr college degree 43%, n=191 21%, n=34 Yes (χ2, p = 0.01) Avg. years in the county 30(1.5b), n=190 38(3.6b), n=34 Yes (Wilcoxon, p=0.03) TABLE 1. Similarities and differences in characteristics of randomly-selected study area residents who did and did not participate in the survey a To test for differences between participants and non-participants, we used chi-square (2) or Fisher’s tests for proportional data and t-tests or Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous data. b Standard error around the average values. Photo: Russell Schnitzer 5PERCEPTIONS ABOUT WATER ISSUES AND WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT Most participants expressed that the long-term availability of water to support agriculture is very important (Table 2). Most participants were very concerned about the possibility of future drought, but very few felt that their communities are prepared for future droughts. For more than half of participants, water was very important for their recreational activities. Most participants perceived that new wind farms will greatly or somewhat enhance the economic sustainability of family farms and ranches. Nearly half of participants perceived that new wind farms will greatly or somewhat decrease wildlife populations, while almost 40% perceived that new wind farms will greatly or somewhat decrease their access to public and private lands where they currently recreate (Table 2). TABLE 2. Summary of participant perceptions related to water issues and wind development Survey question Average score(standard error) Results summary How important to you is the long-term availability of water to support agriculture? 3.14 (0.07)a Extremely or very important: 72% How concerned are you about the possibility of future droughts? 2.94 (0.07)a Extremely or very concerned: 69% How important is water for your recreational activities? 2.82 (0.08)a Extremely or very important: 59% How prepared do you feel your community is to adapt to less water if droughts occur? 1.17 (0.06)a Extremely or very prepared: 5% Generally, how do you think new wind farms may affect the economic sustainability of family farms and ranches? 0.93 (0.07)b Greatly or somewhat enhance: 68% Greatly or somewhat decrease: 6% How do you think new wind farms may affect wildlife populations? -0.65 (0.06)b Greatly or somewhat increase: 3% Greatly or somewhat decrease: 44% How do you think new wind farms may affect your ability to access public or private lands where you currently recreate? -0.43 (0.08)b Greatly or somewhat increase: 14% Greatly or somewhat decrease: 38% aScale of 0 to 4, where 0 = not at all important, concerned, or prepared and 4 = extremely important, concerned, or prepared bScale of -2 to 2, where -2 = greatly decrease, 2 = greatly increase, and 0 = not affected Photo: Ed Orth 6VALUES AND KNOWLEDGE OF PARTICIPANTS Participants were asked to describe how important each of seven values were to them on a scale of not at all important (0) to extremely important (4) and to rate their knowledge and understanding of six issues on a scale of none (0) to excellent (4). Most participants reported that fish and wildlife habitat, availability of water, and open spaces and scenic views were extremely or very important (Figure 1). Economic opportunity was the least important value, with 56% of participants indicating that this value was extremely or very important. Self-reported knowledge was greatest for fish and wildlife habitat and similar for water quality and quantity (Figure 2). Level of knowledge did not differ significantly among the other issues. We included a selection of these questions in our phone survey of non-participants (n=34). The importance of working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and availability of water did not differ between participants and non-participants, but economic opportunities were more important to non- participants (Figure 1). Participants had greater self- described knowledge concerning wind development and fish and wildlife habitat than did non-participants (Figure 2). FIGURE 1. The relative importance of values to survey participants and non-participants. Significant differences1 among participant’s average importance scores are indicated by letters; values that do not share the same letter are different. Differences between participants and non-participants are indicated by an asterisk. FIGURE 2. The relative knowledge of issues, as reported by survey participants and non-participants. Significant differences1 among participant’s average knowledge scores are indicated by letters; issues that do not share the same letter are different. Differences between participants and non-participants are indicated by an asterisk. 1We used Tukey-Kramer HSD tests to identify differences in mean scores among the seven values or six issues. 7MAPS OF IMPORTANT PLACES, DEVELOPMENT PREFERENCES AND LOCAL KNOWLEDGE A total of 6020 points were mapped by 198 partici- pants, with an average of 30 points per participant. Each participant placed three to five markers, on average, for each attribute. Recreation was mapped by the greatest proportion of participants, followed by water and habitat protection (Table 3). The least mapped ‘important place’ attribute was family tradi- tions. Of the three types of development, preferences for wind energy development were mapped most frequently. Attributes representing knowledge of conditions were mapped infrequently overall, with the exception of abundant wildlife (Table 3). Mapped Attribute Number participants (% total) Number points (% total) Important places Recreation 166 (84) 838 (14) Water 140 (71) 470 (8) Habitat protection 131 (66) 597 (10) Open space 124 (63) 494 (8) Agriculture 110 (56) 501 (8) Economic 96 (48) 345 (6) Family traditions 89 (45) 244 (4) Special places 83 (42) 216 (4) Development preferences Wind development 106 (54) 406 (7) Residential development 91 (46) 317 (5) Oil/gas development 75 (38) 284 (5) Knowledge of conditions Abundant wildlife 107 (54) 452 (8) Good water resource 80 (40) 268 (4) Water shortage 70 (35) 222 (4) Good land condition 62 (31) 210 (3) Poor land condition 50 (25) 156 (3) TABLE 3. Summary of participation in the mapping activity We created a 2-km resolution ‘hotspot’ map for each attribute that represented where the highest density of points occurred. Here we provide an overview of methods used to create these maps; detailed technical methods will appear in a related scientific publication. Before creating the maps, we tested whether the points associated with each attribute were distributed randomly or if they occurred in clusters, because randomly distributed points would indicate lack of agreement among participants and a lack of hotspots. All attributes except ‘poor land condition’ exhibited a clustered pattern and were mapped. For each of the 15 attributes we calculated overall density (hotspots) from the individual points using the kernel density method in ArcGIS. This method fits a smoothly curved surface over each point to calculate density per unit area. The value is highest at the point location and diminishes with increasing distance until reaching zero at the extent of a specified search radius. We identified 0.02 points/km2 as a minimum density to include as part of the hotspot maps. This was the density at which approximately 80% of the points were captured by hotspots, on average, across all attributes. The social hotspot maps are displayed on pages 8 to 14. Photo: Scott Copeland Photo: Ken Driese 8HOTSPOT MAPS  IMPORTANT PLACES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Recreation 0 20 4010 Miles It is important to maintain outdoor recreation opportunities in these places. Recreation hotspots Recreation map points Rivers Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Water 0 20 4010 Miles These places are important sources of water. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Water hotspots Water map points Rivers 9HOTSPOT MAPS  IMPORTANT PLACES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Habitat Protection 0 10 205 Miles It is important to protect fish and wildlife habitat in these places. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Habitat protection hotspots Recreation map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Open Space 0 20 4010 Miles It is important to maintain wide open spaces and scenic views in these places. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Open space hotspots Open space map points Rivers 10 HOTSPOT MAPS  IMPORTANT PLACES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Agriculture 0 20 4010 Miles It is important to maintain working farms and ranches in these places. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Agriculture hotspots Agriculture map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Economic 0 20 4010 Miles These places are important because of the economic opportunities they provide. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Economic hotspots Economic map points Rivers 11 HOTSPOT MAPS  IMPORTANT PLACES / DEVELOPMENT PREFERENCES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Family traditions 0 20 4010 Miles These places are important to the traditions and history of my family. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Family tradition hotspots Family tradition map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Residential Development 0 10 205 Miles If new homes are built in these counties, these are the places where I would prefer that development to occur. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Residential development hotspots Residential development map points Rivers 12 HOTSPOT MAPS  DEVELOPMENT PREFERENCES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Wind Development 0 20 4010 Miles If new wind energy farms are built in these counties, these are the places where I would prefer that development to occur. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Wind development hotspots Wind development map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Oil / Gas Development 0 20 4010 Miles If new oil and gas wells are drilled in these counties, these are the places where I would prefer that development to occur. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Oil/gas development hotspots Oil/gas development map points Rivers 13 HOTSPOT MAPS  KNOWLEDGE OF NATURAL RESOURCE CONDITIONS Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Abundant Wildlife 0 20 4010 Miles There are abundant wildlife populations in these places, such as large herds of antelope and deer and large numbers of birds and fish.Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Abundant wildlife hotspots Abundant wildlife map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Good Land Condition 0 20 4010 Miles Lands in these places are in good condition. For example, there is little soil erosion, plenty of native vegetation, and good resources to support wildlife or livestock.Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Good land condition hotspots Good land condition map points Rivers 14 HOTSPOT MAPS  KNOWLEDGE OF NATURAL RESOURCE CONDITIONS Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Good Water Resource 0 20 4010 Miles These streams, rivers, and lakes are in good condition. There is plentiful and good quality water for fish, wildlife, agriculture, and people.Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Good water resource hotspots Good water resource map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain Water Shortage 0 20 4010 Miles There is not enough water in these places to keep up with demand for its use. Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Water shortage hotspots Water shortage map points Rivers Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain 0 10 205 Miles Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Existing wind turbines (FAA 2009) Social preferences for wind development Commercially-viable wind energy resources 15 USING SOCIAL MAPS TO INFORM PLANNING AND DECISIONMAKING The social maps created through this study link important social values to actionable places and provide a collective vision about land uses in specific places. This information is potentially valuable for local planning efforts, such as county comprehensive plans, siting of new development, and prioritizing locations of projects related to recreation, conservation, and water. We illustrate how social maps can inform decision-making through two examples that follow. EXAMPLE: WIND DEVELOPMENT SITING Photo: Paula Hunker Wyoming has some of the best wind energy resources in the nation, and development of utility-scale wind farms has been rapidly increasing. This and previous studies have shown that people in Wyoming value open space, wildlife, and agriculture, all of which may be affected by industrial development. These social values, a history of economic “boom and bust” associated with energy development, and the potential financial rewards of development have all contributed to debate over the benefits and drawbacks of wind development. Maps depicting social preferences for the siting of new wind development can help to inform counties, developers, and others where wind development may receive public support and where conflicts can be anticipated. The map above shows that wind 1 Commercially-viable wind resources are defined as areas having a wind power class of 3 or higher according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and a percent slope of less than 20% (Western Governors’ Association, Western Renewable Energy Zones report, 2009). Photo: Kerry B. Lloyd 1 development was generally preferred close to existing wind farms and along major highways (potential support). Many areas with commercial-quality wind resources lacked collective social preferences for wind development (potential conflict). 16 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXAMPLE: MANAGING WATER RESOURCES Jelm Eden Hanna DixonBaggs Savery Farson Buford Bosler Walcott Rawlins Laramie Bairoil Superior Sinclair Saratoga McFaddenWamsutter Rock River Encampment Centennial Green River Rock Springs Medicine Bow Elk Mountain 0 10 205 Miles Highways Sweetwater County Carbon County Albany County Water shortage Good quality and quantity of water Other important sources of water Rivers Lakes Social hotspot maps For more information about this study, please contact Amy Pocewicz at 307-335-2131 or apocewicz@tnc.org Bibliographic citation: Pocewicz, A., R. Schnitzer, M. Nielsen-Pincus (2010) The social geography of southern Wyoming: important places, development, and natural resource management, The Nature Conservancy, Lander, WY, 16pp. Available at www.nature.org/wyoscience Photo: Sharon O’Toole We are grateful to the Wyoming residents who shared their time for this survey; without their help it would not have been possible to create the social maps presented here. We thank the Ruckelshaus Institute and Diana Hulme for their collaboration in designing and administering the survey, and Greg Brown and the Center for Spatial Information at Central Washington University for designing and hosting the internet version of the survey. Finally, we thank Dot Newton for her hard work turning paper map points into GIS files and for completing the follow-up phone survey of non-participants. The map above shows that areas perceived as important sources of water include mountain streams, reservoirs, and lands irrigated for agricultural production. Water conservation activities that focus on maintaining quality resources may receive strong public support in these places (e.g., irrigation improvements, wetland restoration). Survey participants also identified places where water supply cannot meet demand, which could also inform priorities related to water conservation or storage. Water is vital for sustainable communities, agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, economic development and recreation opportunities. Most of Wyoming’s water comes from snowpack and mountain streams that supply not only Wyoming but also many other downstream states. Demand for water continues to grow, yet its availability may become more unpredictable or decrease with changes in climate and disturbance patterns in mountain watersheds. Management is and will continue to be important for this critical resource.