Appendix E

Visitor Capacity Analysis

Appendix E

Shoreline II Project Visitor Capacity Analysis

Hoonah, Juneau, and Sitka Ranger Districts and

Admiralty National Monument

May 1, 2014

Prepared by:

Shoreline II Core Team for Recreation Special Uses

and Wilderness

Jennifer Berger, Recreation Specialist, Juneau Ranger District/Admiralty National 

Monument

Geno Cisneros, Recreation and Wilderness Specialist, Hoonah RangerDistrict

Kevin Hood, Wilderness Specialist, Juneau Ranger District/Admiralty National 

Monument Jennifer Mac Donald, Recreation and Wilderness Specialist, Sitka 

RangerDistrict

Introduction

This document updates the 2001 visitor capacity analysis developed for the one-half mile shoreline zone 

of Juneau, Hoonah, and Sitka Ranger Districts and Admiralty National Monument (USDA Forest 

Service 2001). This update incorporates current information about recreation use within the analysis 

area, integrates changes that have occurred since 2001 (e.g., 2008 Forest Plan revision), draws from the 

latest information on visitor capacity methodologies, and learns from other recent Tongass visitor 

capacity examples. The intent of this document is also to provide rationale to guide decision-making for 

allocating outfitter/guide use. Therefore, variables used in this analysis (e.g., season dates and group 

size) were based on current guided use information. Capacities were developed in a manner that will 

facilitate outfitter/guide permit administration on the Juneau, Hoonah, and Sitka Ranger Districts and 

Admiralty National Monument; and results of this analysis will be used in a revision of the 2004

Shoreline Outfitter/Guide decision. 

In addition to helping with allocation decisions within the guided and unguided sectors, visitor capacities 

also provide predictability for local businesses and communities, help assess when recreation demand 

may warrant an expansion of current supply, and can serve as a trigger for increased, area-specific 

management attention (Haas 2002). This analysis will allow managers to continue to accommodate an 

economically viable outfitter andguide industry while maintaining the integrity of forest resources to the 

benefit of all users.

Forest Service regulations and policy do not define what is meant by visitor capacity or prescribe a 

specific method for estimating a numerical capacity. Forest Service outfitting and guiding policy includes 

the following direction: 

"When monitoring demonstrates that impacts associated with use may exceed desired conditions, 

conduct a resource capacity analysis to assess the amount of use and types of activities that may be 

conducted without detrimental environmental and associated impacts." (FSH 2709.14 part 53.1f(2)).

Monitoring indicates that although a high amount of use is concentrated in a few areas and locations, 

existing use levels are generally low and can be accommodated without causing unacceptable impacts 

to the environment or visitor experience. There is an advantage to addressing visitor capacity 

proactively, however, before impacts become unacceptable or conflict develops among stakeholders 

(Haas 2002, Whitaker et al. 2010). 

It is important to note that a visitor capacity, in and of itself, does not imply any management action to 

limit or encourage use. Capacity is one component of a management prescription that also includes 

management objectives, desired future conditions, resource condition standards, and a plan for monitoring 

(Stankey and Manning 1986). 

While visitor capacities can inform decisions and commitments, they are not themselves commitments 

(Whitaker et al. 2010). 

Visitor capacities will be reviewed periodically to ensure that assumptions made about recreation use 

trends and impacts still apply, and to incorporate new science, information, policies, trends, plans and 

other circumstances of importance. If monitoring indicates that the visitor capacities identified in this 

analysis are incompatible withthe desired social conditions or resource conditions identified in the 

Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2008), then 

capacities will be adjustedaccordingly.

- 1- 
Figure E-1. Shoreline II Visitor Capacity AnalysisArea.

- 2 - 
Analysis Area

The analysis area comprises National Forest System lands within the Juneau, Hoonah, and Sitka Ranger

Districts and Admiralty National Monument; it does not include State, Native, or private lands within or 

adjacent tothe National Forest. The original analysis divided the analysis area into 37 Use Areas to 

facilitate capacity development. These Use Areas were reviewed and modified to gain administrative 

efficiencies (e.g., original Use Area overlapped Ranger Districts, the new Use Area is split at the district 

boundary) and to resolve conflicting resource management goals (e.g., original Use Areas combined 

designated wilderness and non-wilderness lands, several of the new Use Areas separate designated 

wilderness lands and non-wilderness lands to allow for a more targeted approach to capacity within those 

areas). Changes in use patterns also resulted in modifying Use Areas, as well as the additions of the 

Cross-Admiralty Canoe Route and the Pack Creek Zoological Area (excluding summer season). 

Modifications resulted in a total of 48 Use Areas (Figure 1). Two Use Areas (04-05B Mitchell Bay and 

01-04E Juneau Icefields) continue to be excluded from the analysis area. Mitchell Bay is being analyzed 

separately, and the Juneau Icefields are outside the scope of this analysis.

Scope of Analysis 

The focus of this analysis is on non-motorized land-based activities that originate from the marine

shoreline. Recreationists traveling by boat (e.g., sightseeing, fishing) or anchored on the saltwater who 

do not set foot on the National Forest are not considered in the visitor capacity figures.

Visitor Capacity Methodology

There is no established methodology in Forest Service policy for developing numerical visitor 

capacities (Cole and Carlson 2010). There is some level of uncertainty in describing and analyzing 

recreational use. Due toconditions varying from weather to wildlife sightings to the state of financial 

markets, the location, type, and amount of recreational use in any area changes irregularly, which makes 

calculating capacity difficult. DifferentForest Service districts have used different approaches to setting 

visitor capacity and allocating between guided and unguided visitors, each district determines what fits 

best for their area.

Visitor Capacity Definition

The 2004 Shoreline Outfitter/Guide decision defined recreation capacity as “the number of recreation 

users that can be accommodated in a given area without loss of the quality of the natural environment 

and/or the visitor experience” (USDA Forest Service, 2004, Appendix F, p. 10). This definition has not 

changed for this update; however, the terminology has been changed from “recreation” to “visitor” 

capacity in keeping with currentthinking regarding capacity analysis (Cole and Carlson 2010). It should 

also be noted that visitor capacity is an administrative decision about a reasonable number of recreation 

opportunities that will be managed for, which is consistent with and helps achieve the full management 

prescription for an area (Whittaker et al. 2010). 

Types of Visitor Capacity

In the past, multiple capacities were developed based on physical, facility, ecological, and social 

resources. Current thinking suggests that managers take a more holistic approach to developing a 

- 3-
numerical visitor capacity (Cole and Carlson, 2010). Visitor capacity has both environmental and social 

dimensions. Visitor use can affect biophysical resources such as soils, vegetation, water, and wildlife, and 

it can degrade the quality of visitor experiences through crowding, conflicting uses, or aesthetic effects on 

the environment (Whittaker et al. 2010). Unfortunately, there is a lack of baseline information about both 

the natural environment in and around recreational use sites and the environmental impacts of recreational 

use in the analysis area. Even if there was additional informationavailable, scientists agree that the 

relationship between visitor use and impacts is often weak (Haas 2007) and poorly understood. Integrating 

resource and social information into visitor capacity decision-making has always beena challenge for 

managers and researchers (Newman et al. 2001). 

One way that managers can address these challenges is by identifying which resources are most likely to 

be atrisk with high levels of visitor use (Cole and Carlson 2010). For this analysis, the social experience 

has been determined to be the most limiting factor (meaning that visitor experiences suffer from crowding 

before the natural resource suffers impacts) to determine the appropriate recreation capacity levels in the 

analysis area, which is consistent with the 2004 Shoreline Outfitter/Guide analysis and other 

outfitter/guide capacity analyses on the Tongass. 

Calculating Shoreline II Visitor Capacity

The Juneau, Hoonah, and Sitka Ranger Districts and Admiralty National Monument chose a 

methodology that is simple in concept and is repeatable to facilitate future capacity updates, as needed. 

In contrast to the 2001 analysis, visitor service day was chosen as the unit of measure rather than 

groups-at-one-time. This changewill allow more accurate translation to the outfitter/guide permitting 

process, which authorizes commercial use in service days. A service day is defined as “a day or any part 

of a day on National Forest System lands for which an outfitter or guide provides services to a client” 

(FSH 2709.14 part 53.1e). 

The formula: 

Capacity Locations

These are defined as locations used to calculate visitor capacities and were identified based on 

information gathered on current recreational use patterns. The following describes the process used to 

determine the number of Capacity Locations within each Use Area.

Step 1. A dataset was compiled of known recreation use sites within the analysis area from the 

following sources:

a. Tongass Outfitter and Guide Database1 for all known locations used by guides within

the analysis

area.

b. Outfitter/guides were asked at annual meetings and information worksheet mailings.

c. The general public was queried using public meetings, information worksheets,

newspaper advertisements, radio interviews, and in-person contacts in the field.

d. Forest Service staff was asked at district IDT meetings and informal conversations.

Visitor Capacity = # of capacity locations x # of days in season x average 

- 4 -
e. Field monitoring was conducted by Forest Service staff, contractors, partners, and

volunteers during the summer seasons in 2011, 2012, and 2013.

f. Internal recreation site databases (INFRA Wild and Recreation Use Site GIS layer).

Step 2. Recreation use sites were then grouped together and considered a single location to 

eliminate double counting of sites that were identified in more than one of the 

processes listed above. Sites were also grouped together to integrate Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) social experience standards identified in the Forest Plan 

Land Use Designations (LUD). Grouping was done using the following criteria:

a. Sites within sight or sound of each other.

b. Sites that met proximity guidelines.

Proximity Guidelines

Three LUD/ROS categories were identified for grouping sites; buffer distances were developed for each 

based on the ROS Remoteness setting standards in the Forest Plan:

i. Wilderness LUD (Primitive ROS Class with site-specific exceptions): 3-mile buffer

forall seasons.

ii. Non-Wilderness LUD (Primitive, Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, and Semi-Primitive

Motorized ROS Classes): 1-mile buffer for summer season; 2-mile buffer forfallwinter- spring seasons.

iii. Non-Wilderness LUD (Roaded Natural, Roaded Modified, and Rural ROS Classes): 1⁄2-

mile buffer for summer season; 1-mile buffer for fall-winter-spring seasons.

1 The Tongass Outfitter and Guide Database is used to record and track information about actual guided use across the Tongass

National Forest. Use information is submitted annually by outfitters and guides and includes specific data about location, date of

use, activity, group size, and duration of stay. Information submitted for use between 2004 and 2012 was included in this

analysis.

Wilderness LUD

The Wilderness Act of 1964 establishes standards that must be met when determining the capacity for

commercial use in designated wilderness. The law mandates the preservation of wilderness character and 

that wilderness character must be upheld for any uses for which wilderness is administered. The legal 

definition of wilderness defines hallmark qualities of wilderness: natural, undeveloped, untrammeled and 

outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. The law also 

checks unwilding agents, prohibiting commercial enterprise with a conditional and optional allowance 

for limited commercialservices.

Commercial use can only be authorized to the extent that it does not impair wilderness character. Since

this analysis is focusing on the social experience as the limiting factor, this means that Outstanding 

Opportunities for Solitude is the most sensitive indicator for wilderness character and that protecting it 

should ensure that theother qualities fare well. In order to uphold Outstanding Opportunities for 

Solitude in wilderness, this analysis appliesa three-mile buffer around recreation use sites, for all 

seasons, to provide adequate spacing between groups. Three miles is used as the buffer distance

because: 

• It represents the ROS Remoteness setting standard of being beyond the sights and

sounds of other human activity.

• It is the approximate distance at which kayaking groups lose sight of one another (David

- 5 -
Burch, Fundamentals of Kayak Navigation); kayaking is a common wilderness recreation experience 

sought within and/or adjacentto the analysis area.

In providing an optional and conditional allowance for commercial services, the Wilderness Act 

authorizes such uses “to the extent necessary.” Visitor 

capacity and commercial allocation can be framed quantitatively (how many), spatially (where) and 

temporally (when) and these parameters must be applied to ensure that any commercial authorization 

only occurs to the extent necessary.

This analysis establishes overall recreation visitor capacity across the analysis area. Wilderness

Commercial Needs Assessments were completed for all six wilderness areas within the analysis area and 

are additionally used as a basis for this capacity analysis (USDA Forest Service, 2014a-d and 2013). 

This analysis further applies theextent necessary parameters to visitor capacity by using the three-mile 

buffer zones for focal locations within UseAreas. The extent necessary will also be taken into account in 

ascribing use levels in the next phase of the Shoreline II project (environmental analysis) by assessing 

the relationship between management goals, resource concerns, historic commercial use levels and 

capacity determinations.

More refined extent necessary measures should be considered at local administrative levels, such as

environmental assessments, prospectus competitive bid processes and permit authorizations. Additional 

quantitative, spatial and temporal considerations could include prohibiting commercial use in areas 

popular for local or subsistence use, limiting commercial numbers during times of high local use such as 

holidays or opening days of hunting/fishing seasons and further limiting commercial allocation numbers 

should such use impact wilderness character before Shoreline II maximum allocation levels are reached.

Non-Wilderness LUDs

The ROS Remoteness setting standard for the more developed LUD category (Roaded Natural to 

Rural) has the expectation of being within one-half mile or less of human activity. The standard for 

the less developed Non- Wilderness LUD category (Semi-Primitive to Primitive) has the expectation 

of being no closer than one-half mile (depending on terrain) to human activity. One-half mile was 

used as a starting point for the more developed LUD for the summer season buffer distance; this was 

then doubled to one mile for the Semi-Primitive toPrimitive category for the summer season to take 

into account the more remote setting expectations.

For the fall-winter-spring seasons, the buffer sizes were doubled based on the general assumption 

that parties recreating in the “off-season” have the expectation of fewer encounters with other 

parties. The larger buffers during the fall, winter, and spring seasons encompassed more sites 

(grouping more sites together), which translates intoa smaller total number of Capacity Locations. 

This in turn, results in a lower overall visitor capacity. Figure 2 illustrates the difference between the 

seasons after sites were grouped. 

Appendix A provides a map for each Use Area for the summer and fall-winter-spring seasons that

illustrate Capacity Locations. 

- 6 -
Figure E-2. Example of site grouping between the summer and fall-winter-spring

seasons.

Summer Season = 12 Capacity Locations Fall-Winter-Spring Seasons = 7 Capacity Locations

- 7 -
Seasons

This variable was defined as the number of calendar days in each season. Dates of each season 

were determined by the 2004 Shoreline Outfitter/Guide decision with some modifications based 

on current use patterns. Seasons were defined as follows and Table 1 lists the actual tally of days 

for each UseArea:

1. Spring: March 15 to May 20/May 31. Season start date was extended to earlier in the

year to accommodate demand for guided activities and align with the start of brown

bear hunting season. There was no change to the season end dates, which are

determined by the brown bear hunting season closure.

2. Summer: May 21/June 1 to September 14. Season start date for each Use Area

was determined by the brown bear hunting season closure. There is no change in

summer dates from the 2004 decision.

3. Fall: September 15 to December 31. There was no change to the season start date.

Season end datewas extended to accommodate demand for guide activities and align

with the brown bear huntingseason closure.

4. Winter: January 1 to March 14. Although not included in the 2004 decision, a winter

season was included in this analysis to provide opportunities for winter guiding. There

is currently a limited demand forguide activities in the winter season.

Average Group Size

This was determined for each Use Area using current actual use data from the Tongass 

Outfitter andGuide Database for each season. A five year average was calculated based on 

data from 2008-2012. For those Use Areas that adequate data did not exist, the average across 

all Use Areas for the pertinent season was used. Forthe purposes of this analysis, adequate data 

was defined as 20 or more groups using the area during the five year period; and use occurred 

at least three out of the five years. In a few cases where there was lack of data, the adjacent use 

area average was determined more representative of the use patterns and was used in lieu ofthe 

project-wide seasonal average. For example, 04-15B and 04-15C in the West ChichagofYakobi Wilderness receives little use in the summer season. The adjacent use area (04-15D), 

which also encompasseswilderness lands, receives enough use to generate an average group 

size of 4.7. Rather than using the project-wide summer average of 6.8, the lower average group 

size was used.

Considerations and Assumptions

The decision to include known recreation use sites in the analysis, versus all accessible 

acreage, is consistentwith the definition of visitor capacity as a “reasonable use level” for 

Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Thedecision is based on the assumption that certain 

locations are attractive to visitors because of the types ofrecreation opportunities available 

(e.g. salmon streams for fishing, hiking trails, camping locations, and public use cabins), ease 

of access, and unique scenic qualities. Large portions of the district are inaccessible and/or 

less desirable for recreational use, which tends to be concentrated over time (e.g. during a 

particular hunting or fishing season) and space, rather than evenly distributed.

This analysis is based on the assumption that recreation activities and impacts will continue to 

be concentratedin areas where access is feasible and desirable recreational opportunities exist 

(e.g. fishing and hunting). Acalculation of visitor capacity based on overall acreage of the Use 

Area may exceed the “reasonable use level” that canbe accommodated without unacceptable 

- 8 - 
impacts to resources, wilderness character, and visitor experiences in the areas of actual use. It 

is important to note that when this capacity analysis is revisited, additional monitoring

information will be available and new capacity locations may be included or excluded based on 

changes in guided and unguided use and impacts, and Forest Service policies.

For each Use Area, the number of Capacity Locations was multiplied by the number of days in 

each season to calculate visitor capacity in groups. In order to calculate visitor capacity in number 

of visitor service days, which is the unit used in outfitter and guide permit administration, the 

capacity expressed as the number of groupswas multiplied by average guided group size for each 

Use Area.

The decision to use average guided group size was based on the following considerations and 

assumptions:

• Little information exists about the size of unguided groups visiting the analysis area, and

monitoring and experience show that guided and unguided group sizes tend to be similar.

• Similar types of guided and unguided activities occur in many areas. Guided and unguided visitors

are drawn to similar areas for similar experiences and unguided group sizes are determined by the

type of activity and experience being sought by the visitor.

The visitor capacity calculation is based on the conservative assumption that only one group can be 

accommodated at each Capacity Location each day during the season. In reality, a location may be able 

to accommodate several groups in one day without negative impacts to visitor experience. For 

example, a group may spend two hours hiking a trail in the morning and then depart, and other groups 

may arrive to hike the trail throughout the remainder of the same day. Conversely, the visitor capacity 

calculation is also based on the assumption that each locationcan be used each day of the spring, 

summer, fall, and winter seasons. In reality, many locations are not usedregularly; factors such as 

weather, snow cover, and availability of desired recreation opportunities (e.g., fish runs) influence the 

amount of use that occurs, or does not occur, in a particular location each day. As a result, a balance is

created by including both liberal and conservative assumptions in the visitor capacity calculations. The 

formula described results in a reasonable number of people that can be accommodated in a given Use 

Area and season, without detriment to the resource or visitor experience.

- 9 -
Shoreline II Visitor Capacities

The following table lists the visitor capacity estimates (expressed in service days) for the analysis area based on the new Use Areas. The 

Use Areas with designated wilderness are shaded in the table below.

Table E-1. Visitor capacity estimates for the Juneau, Hoonah, and Sitka Ranger Districts and Admiralty National

Monument.

Use 

Area

# of

Capacity

Locations

FallWinterSpring

# of

Capacity

Locations

Summer

Spring

(March 15 – May 20 or

31)

Summer

(May 21 or June 1– Sept

14)

Fall

(Sept 15 – Dec 31)

Winter

(Jan 1 – March 14) 

# of

Calendar 

Days

Avg. 

Group

Size

Visitor 

Capacity

# of

Calendar 

Days

Avg. 

Group

Size

Visitor 

Capacity

# of

Calendar 

Days

Avg. 

Group

Size

Visitor 

Capacity

# of

Calendar 

Days

Avg. 

Group

Size

Visitor 

Capacity

01-01 6 7 78 4.0 1,872 106 6.0 4,452 108 4.0 2,592 73 4.0 1,752

01-02 2 3 78 2.0 312 106 4.0 1,272 108 2.0 432 73 2.0 292

01-03 9 13 78 3.1 2,206 106 5.4 7,472 108 3.2 3,110 73 3.2 2,102

01-04A 3 4 78 4.3 1,006 106 6.8 2,886 108 3.2 1,037 73 3.2 701

01-04B 4 8 78 4.3 1,342 106 8.9 7,516 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

01-04C 10 16 78 4.3 3,354 106 6.8 11,533 108 3.2 3,456 73 3.2 2,336

01-04D 1 1 78 4.3 335 106 5.8 617 108 3.2 346 73 3.2 234

01-05A 1 2 78 4.8 373 106 5.7 1,200 108 3.2 346 73 3.2 234

01-05B 10 20 78 8.8 6,864 106 12.1 25,652 108 3.2 3,456 73 3.2 2,336

01-05C 9 19 78 6.0 4,212 106 11.4 22,960 108 3.2 3,110 73 3.2 2,102

01-05D 3 3 78 4.3 1,006 106 6.8 2,162 108 3.6 1,168 73 3.2 701

01-05E 2 2 78 4.3 671 106 7.2 1,526 108 3.2 691 73 3.2 467

01-05F 7 7 78 4.7 2,540 106 8.2 6,119 108 2.0 1,512 73 3.2 1,635

04-01A 5 5 78 4.6 1,785 106 6.0 3,199 108 2.5 1,362 73 3.2 1,168

04-01B 7 12 78 5.7 3,125 106 6.3 7,950 108 3.2 2,419 73 3.2 1,635

04-01C 3 4 67 4.3 864 117 6.8 3,182 108 3.2 1,037 73 3.2 701

04-02A 6 12 78 4.3 2,012 106 10.4 14,602 108 3.2 2,074 73 3.2 1,402

04-02B 14 14 78 3.3 3,572 106 3.9 5,829 108 1.7 2,576 73 3.2 3,270

- 10 -
04-02C 6 13 78 4.3 2,012 106 6.8 9,370 108 3.2 2,074 73 3.2 1,402

04-02D 7 11 78 2.5 1,340 106 3.6 4,172 108 3.2 2,419 73 3.2 1,635

04-03 33 50 78 4.8 12,355 106 5.6 29,680 108 3.7 13,187 73 3.2 7,709

04-04A 4 8 67 4.3 1,152 117 11.4 10,670 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

o4-04B 10 22 67 4.3 2,881 117 10.3 26,512 108 3.9 4,253 73 3.2 2,336

04-04C 1 4 67 4.3 288 117 3.6 1,675 108 3.2 346 73 3.2 234

04-05A 5 5 67 2.0 660 117 4.1 2,425 108 3.2 1,728 73 3.2 1,168

04-06A 4 4 67 3.8 1,018 117 7.2 3,370 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

04-06B 4 4 67 3.8 1,011 117 7.3 3,436 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

04-07A 4 4 67 4.3 1,152 117 5.9 2,765 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

04-07B 5 5 67 4.3 1,452 117 5.2 3,036 108 3.2 1,728 73 3.2 1,168

04-08 8 8 67 4.3 2,305 117 6.8 6,365 108 3.2 2,765 73 3.2 1,869

04-09A 5 5 67 4.3 1,441 117 6.8 3,978 108 3.2 1,728 73 3.2 1,168

04-09B 5 * 67 4.3 1,441 * * * 108 3.2 1,728 73 3.2 1,168

04-10A 1 1 67 4.3 288 117 8.5 999 108 5.3 572 73 3.2 234

04-10B 11 12 67 4.3 3,169 117 4.0 5,148 108 3.2 3,802 73 3.2 2,570

04-11A 8 12 67 4.3 2,305 117 5.4 7,582 108 3.2 2,765 73 3.2 1,869

04-11B 8 13 67 4.3 2,305 117 6.5 9,887 108 11.0 9,504 73 3.2 1,869

04-12 12 20 67 2.0 1,608 117 4.3 9,954 108 3.2 4,147 73 3.2 2,803

04-13 14 24 67 4.3 4,033 117 7.2 20,218 108 2.9 4,385 73 3.2 3,270

04-14 7 7 78 2.3 1,245 106 4.2 3,145 108 3.2 2,419 73 3.2 1,635

04-15A 10 17 78 4.3 3,354 106 2.6 4,755 108 3.2 3,456 73 3.2 2,336

04-15B 9 9 78 4.3 3,019 106 4.7 4,484 108 3.2 3,110 73 3.2 2,102

04-15C 3 3 78 4.3 1,006 106 4.7 1,495 108 3.2 1,037 73 3.2 701

04-15D 7 7 78 4.3 2,348 106 4.7 3,487 108 3.2 2,419 73 3.2 1,635

04-16A 4 7 78 4.3 1,342 106 4.9 3,650 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

04-16B 5 10 78 2.1 814 106 4.6 4,888 108 3.2 1,728 73 3.2 1,168

04-16C 6 9 78 11.7 5,476 106 11.0 10,494 108 3.2 2,074 73 3.2 1,402

04-16D 4 4 78 4.3 1,342 106 4.2 1,769 108 3.2 1,382 73 3.2 934

04-16E 6 7 78 11.9 5,569 106 12.7 9,423 108 3.2 2,074 73 3.2 1,402

*04-09B Pack Creek Zoological Area – The summer season from June 1 to September 10 is covered under a separate environmental analysis, and will not be covered under

Shoreline II. The period from September 11 – 14 will be amended into the existing Pack Creek Zoological Area NEPA at the next available opportunity.

- 11 - 
References

Cole, D. and T. Carlson. 2010. Numerical visitor capacity: A guide to its use in wilderness. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. RMRS-GTR-247. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 20 p. 

Haas, G. E. 2002. Visitor Capacity on Public Lands and Waters: Making Better Decisions. A Report of 

the Federal Interagency Task Force on Visitor Capacity on Public Lands. Submitted to the Assistant 

Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington D.C. May 1, 

2002. Published by the National Recreation and Park Association, Ashburn, Virginia.

Haas, G. E. 2007. The Myths of Visitor Capacity. Parks & Recreation September 2007, The Myths of

Visitor Capacity. 

Newman, P., J. L. Marion, and K. Cahill. 2001. Integrating resource, social, and managerial indicators of 

quality into carrying capacity decision-making. George Wright Forum 18(3): 28-40. 

Stankey, G. and R. Manning. 1986. Carrying capacity of recreation settings. A Literature Review: The 

President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 

M-47-M-57. 

USDA Forest Service. 2014a. Tracy Arm-Ford’s Terror & Chuck River Wilderness CommercialNeeds 

Assessment, Juneau Ranger District, Tongass National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2014b. Determination of Need for Commercial Services, 

Pleasant/Lemesurier/InianIslands Wilderness Area, Hoonah Ranger District, Tongass National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2014c. Determination of Need for Commercial Outfitter/Guide Services in the

South Baranof Wilderness, Sitka Ranger District, Tongass National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2014d. Determination of Need for Commercial Outfitter/Guide Services in the

West Chichagof-Yakobi Wilderness, Sitka Ranger District, Tongass National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2013. Kootznoowoo Wilderness Commercial Needs Assessment, Admiralty Island 

National Monument, Tongass National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan. Tongass National Forest.

R10-MB- 603b. Juneau, AK: USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 2004. Shoreline Outfitter/Guide Record of Decision and Final Environmental 

Impact Statement, Volume I-III, R10-MB-519c. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Shoreline-Based Recreation Carrying Capacity Analysis for the Admiralty

Island National Monument, Hoonah, Juneau, and Sitka Ranger Districts, Tongass NationalForest.

Whitaker, D., B. Shelby, R., Manning, D., Cole, and G. Haas. 2010. Capacity reconsidered: Finding 

consensus and clarifying differences. Marienville, PA: National Association of Recreation Resource 

Planners. 

- 12 -
Appendix A. Capacity Location Maps
Figure E-3. Southeast Admiralty capacity locations, summer season.
Figure E-4. Southeast Admiralty capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-5. Pybus Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-6. Pybus Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-7. Eliza Harbor capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-8. Eliza Harbor capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-9. Gambier Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-10. Gambier Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-11. Cross-Admiralty Canoe Route capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-12. Cross-Admiralty Canoe Route, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-13. Northeast Admiralty capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-14. Northeast Admiralty capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
.. 

* 

• 

Cabin 

Town 

Stream 

SEYMOUR CANAL 

Use Area: 04-09A 

c::J Use Area 

� Capacity Location 

D Salt and Freshwater 

Recreation Site D Wilderness 

-Non-National Forest Land 0 1.753.5 10.5 

IMC:::JM•o••••===:::i•

7 Miles 

Summer Season 

Figure E-14. Seymour Canal capacity locations, Summer season. 
Figure E-16. Seymour Canal capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-17. Pack Creek zoological area, Summer season.
Figure E-18. Pack Creek Zoological Area capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring

seasons.
Figure E-19. Greens Creek capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-20. Greens Creek capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-21. Port Frederick capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-22. Port Frederick capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-23. Freshwater Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-24. Freshwater Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-25. Lisianski capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-26. Lisianski capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-27. West Yakobi Island capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-28. West Yakobi Island capacity location, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-29. Stag Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-30. Stag Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-31. Point Adolphus capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-32. Point Adolphus capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-33. North Chichagof capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-34. North Chichagof capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-35. Idaho Inlet capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-36. Idaho Inlet capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-37. PLI Wilderness capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-38. PLI Wilderness capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-39. Port Althorp capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-40. Port Althorp capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-41. Skagway Area capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-42. Skagway Area capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-43. Haines Area capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-44. Haines Area capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-45. East Chilkats capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-46. East Chilkats capacity location, Fall, Winter, and Spring season.
Figure E-47. Berners Bay capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-48. Berners Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-49. North Juneau Coast capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-50. North Juneau Coast capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-51. Taku Inlet capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-52. Taku Inlet capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-53. Slocum Inlet capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-54. Slocum Inlet capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-55. Taku Harbor capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-56. Taku Harbor capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-57. Port Snettisham capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-58. Port Snettisham capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-59. Windham Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-60. Windham Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-61. Tracy Arm capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-62. Tracy Arm capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-63. Fords Terror capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-64. Fords Terror capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-65. Endicott Arm capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-66. Endicott Arm capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-67. Gut Bay, Baranof capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-68. Gut Bay, Baranof capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-69. Port Armstrong capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-70. Port Armstrong capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-71. Nelson Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-72. Nelson Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-73. Redoubt Lake capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-74. Redoubt Lake capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-75. Whale Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-76. Whale Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-77. Necker Islands capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-78. Necker Islands capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-79. Southwest Baranof capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-80. Southwest Baranof capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-81. Sitka Area capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-82. Sitka Area capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-83. Rodman Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-84. Rodman Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-85. Kelp Bay capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-86. Kelp Bay capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.
Figure E-87. Baranof Warm Springs capacity location, Summer season.
Figure E-88. Baranof Warm Springs capacity location, Fall, Winter, and 

Spring seasons. 
Figure E-89. Tenakee Inlet capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-90. Tenakee Inlet capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-91. Peril Strait capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-92. Peril Strait capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-93. Slocum Arm capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-94. Slocum Arm capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons. 
Figure E-95. Portlock Harbor capacity locations, Summer season.
Figure E-96. Portlock Harbor capacity locations, Fall, Winter, and Spring seasons.