Regional Council Advice on TVA’s Draft Recreation Strategy
August 23-24, 2005, meeting
1. Is the proposed recreation strategy consistent with previous Council advice? If not, how is it inconsistent and what changes should be made?
Yes, but it can be refined.
TVA is operating reservoirs in accordance with the ROS, including the changes made to enhance recreation.
Reservoir maps difficult to find, especially in marinas.
How much of the revenue for recreation program comes from user fees? Not much.
2. Does this Council think that the proposed recreation strategy identifies an appropriate role for TVA in helping to meet the recreation needs of Valley stakeholders? If not, what specific changes are needed?
Yes, TVA is working in partnership with stakeholder groups. Keeps TVA’s costs low.
Need balance between gathering data and planning and implementing. Need more information on implementation, especially in regards to State recreation plans. This plan should require a more specific, on-the-ground, recreation plan for sub-areas of the Valley. Possibly use the existing seven watershed teams.
TDEC has recently released a recreation plan — how does TVA plan fit with that (i.e., ATV use)? Address jointly instead of separately.
How will all recreation users be surveyed regarding use and wants/needs over an extended period of time?
TVA took the initiative to establish a plan and then invited input from stakeholders. Took the information and created an improved plan. The input included state agencies. TVA and TDEC have cooperated on issues common to both agencies.
Coordination is a key factor. All parties and partnerships and affected groups should work together rather than independently.
3. Are the proposed objectives and actions adequate to achieve the strategy’s visions and goals? What other actions are needed to meet existing or projected recreation needs? What types of partnerships should we pursue?
An additional goal should be added to state that natural resources are linked to recreation. Conservation of natural resources will allow for quality recreation experiences over an extended period of time. Can make it easier to manage stakeholder issues/conflicts.
Valued and imperiled natural resources exist across the Valley. Plan should include explicit references to specific conservation / protection issues (i.e., Threatened & Endangered species).
Limit and/or prohibit recreational activities in areas where public use threatens the natural resources (camping, ATV use). Similar to NPS rules, state quotas.
All sites don’t have to be all things to all people. Management of the resource should be able to dictate where certain activities are permitted.
Management/control of personal watercraft/jet ski use is not part of TVA’s duties. Same question in regards to ATVs. Designating certain areas and/or times for specific uses should continue to be considered in an effort to maximize recreation opportunities.
TVA owns the land and the ownership allows for control and use of the land. TVA has limited police power in regards to watercraft use.
Recreation is not a standalone issue. Related to economic development, wildlife, etc. Recreation tourism is a part of economic development, and can be quantified by econometric studies.
Definitive user surveys will quantify how recreation relates to global issues like economic development. Add dollars as a metric for how recreation impacts, biodiversity, etc. is measured.
Ken Cordell from Forest Service has developed a recognized method for addressing economic value of recreation. TVA should collect data to feed the model.
TVA should participate and encourage coordination with state agencies for data collection, and will save money in the long run.
Find more innovative approaches to manage more formal recreation areas. Management can be more self-sustaining (Sale Creek).
Did TVA examine other practices from other systems? Yes, but can do more.
Develop an action plan for each of the seven watershed areas, based on the strategic plan. Different sets of stakeholders will be part of teams, depending on region, use. Encourage TVA to continue to fund watershed teams across the Valley.
Goal 2 in Action 9 and Goal 3 in Action 5: Value in localized perspectives. Move to specific actions in each watershed.
Property ownership under the reservoir is a State issue.
Safety and security should be considered as a component of the planning process.
Partnerships should be innovative and use anything that works.
Vision statement implies that TVA will work only in partnership. Sometimes TVA should just work on its own. If TVA can’t find a partner, is it a worthwhile effort? Focus on areas and issues where partnerships are available.
TVA often has to work in partnership with state agencies and others, especially in regards to aquatic recreation.