PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
The Verde Valley's scenic, natural, and cultural/historic resources contribute, perhaps more than anything else, to the high quality of life in the valley. Moreover, they attract large numbers of tourists each year, who are major contributors to the local economy. In the face of rapid population growth and development in the valley, care must be taken to ensure an undiminshed quality of life for all who live here, both now and in the future. This makes it essential that these critical resources be carefully protected and, where appropriate, carefully developed. Because public opinions and attitudes can have a strong impact on how development occurs, as well as on the extent to which these very important resources are protected in the process, this survey was conducted to determine how important local residents feel these resources are in the valley's future development plans.
In conjunction with the Verde River Corridor Project, in the Fall of 1990 Dr. Donovan D. Wilkin, Associate Professor, and researchers at the School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of Arizona, conducted a survey of Verde Valley residents to determine their feelings about growth and development and, in particular, about the role that scenic, natural, and cultural/historical resources play in such growth. Similar surveys have been conducted in the San Pedro River Valley and the Gila River Valley, and the results have just recently been compiled. Following is Dr. Wilkin's summary of the Verde Valley survey results.
Verde Valley residents do not seem to see any inconsistency in favoring growth on the one hand and protection of their natural resources on the other. Riverine resources were valued highly by the great majority of respondents in all three studies. Similarly, growth seems generally favored in all three areas.
A majority of respondents from the Verde Valley favored growth in most sectors of life in the valley (53% to 81% favored, depending on the type of growth) with the exception of mobile home parks (40% favored), seasonal apartments (40% favored), and fast food facilities (46% favored). The kinds of growth preferred included both winter and summer tourists (75% favored); retired and working permanent residents (78% favored); the industrial and commercial sectors (72% favored); and motels, restaurants, and shopping malls (65% favored).
Strong majorities agreed with the allocation of taxes and water to support and maintain present levels of development (70% favored), including agriculture. Protection of existing wildlife and natural resources received the highest positive rating (80% favored). Nonetheless, the majority opposes allocating taxes and water to specifically provide for growth in any of the current community sectors (only 34% to 43% favored), with the single exception of improving the river and its plant, animal, and bird life (61% favored).
The majority favored the use of public funds to gradually purchase rights in private lands along the Verde River (62% favored), favored the designation of a water management authority to promote and enforce water conservation to protect the Verde River (73% favored), and strongly favored the public control and limitation of residential and commercial development in the Verde Valley as necessary to protect the river (72% favored). A strong majority favored blocking all further transfers, trades, or sales of water out of the Verde Valley (85.1% favored and only 5.3% opposed).
There was also strong support for vesting a valley-wide authority with power to protect the valley's scenic, natural, and cultural/historical resources through various means including a public planning and review process for development and use of surrounding lands (72% favored).
Eighty percent of the respondents thought that development on private land should only be allowed when significant wildlife and natural communities are adequately protected. Fifty-five percent thought that the costs to private citizens of protecting these resources would be more than compensated by increases in property values, growth in economic activity, and improved quality of living.
Thirty-nine percent of respondents were "extremely" satisfied and 43% were "generally" satisfied with their quality of living. The valley's present scenic quality (89%), air quality (89%), and access to outdoor recreation (87%) and national park facilities (84%) were expressed as the principal contributors to their high quality of living. As regards development of the Verde River Corridor, passive activities such as walking, picnicking, birdwatching, swimming, and fishing were accorded high importance (60% to 84%) as compared with more active pastimes like RV camping, off-road vehicle use, hunting, paramilitary games and the like ( only 8% to 33%).
These results are very similar to those found in the San Pedro River Valley, another river system considered to be of exceptionally high quality when compared to others in the region. Results for the Gila River system are still being analyzed, but it appears not to be nearly has highly regarded by its neighbors as these two much higher quality river systems.
Overall, Verde Valley residents ranked their scenic, natural, and cultural/historic resources as very important to their quality of life; in particular, wildlife and natural resources were ranked highest. It was generally agreed that development and growth are desirable and important, and tax money and water should be allocated at present levels of growth but that the resource values should be protected. Furthermore, it was generally agreed that some type of management authority for the Verde Valley with limited powers should be established to enforce water conservation among all users, to protect water quality of the Verde River, and to promote its rational use for the environmentally sensitive development of the valley.
The following percentages express specific results of the public opinion survey.
Demographics:
Percent of respondents who:
Are permanent valley residents 89.4%
Voted in the last general election 87.2
Get local news from local radio or TV 72.3
Make majority of household purchases
in Cottonwood 66.0
Subscribe to/read local paper 59.6
Live in a local city, town, or community 56.4
Favor expanding the County Board of
Supervisors to a more representative number 51.0
(opposed to this are 24.5%)
Are registered Republican 50.0
(36.2% Democrat)
Are female 45.7
Length of time respondents have lived in the Verde Valley:
0 to 5 years 26.6%
6 to 10 years 29.8
11 to 15 years 13.8
16 to 20 years 08.5
More than 20 years 10.6
All their life 02.1
Born in Verde Valley 05.3
Age of respondents:
18 to 25 years 02.1%
26 to 35 years 09.6
36 to 45 years 18.1
46 to 55 years 18.1
56 to 65 years 23.4
66 to 75 years 20.2
Over 75 years 05.3
Total annual household income of respondents:
$5,000 to $9,999 04.3%
$10,000 to $19,999 33.0
$20,000 to $29,999 20.2
$30,000 to $39,999 12.8
$40,000 to $49,999 10.6
$50,000 to $74,999 09.6
$75,000 to $99,999 00.0
$100,000 or more 01.1
Respondent's highest level of education attained:
No formal education 02.1%
Completed grade school 01.1
Completed middle or junior high school 04.3
Completed high school 21.3
Completed at least some college 31.9
Bachelor's degree 19.1
Master's degree 10.6
Doctoral or higher degree 04.3
Survey Results:
Twelve most important potential uses of the Verde River Corridor (percent of respondents considering this a very or somewhat important potential use):
Walking access to the river 84.0%
Picnicking 80.9
Hiking 78.3
Photography 74.5
Bank fishing 70.2
Swimming/wading 65.9
Birdwatching/nature study 62.8
Handicap access 62.8
Landscape sketching/painting 60.7
Tent/outdoor camping 55.4
Horseback riding 53.2
Bike access to river 53.2
Nine least important potential uses of the Verde River Corridor (percent of respondents considering this a very or somewhat unimportant potential use):
Paramilitary games/maneuvers 71.3%
Trapping 71.3
Off-road vehicle use 62.8
Mountain bike riding 52.1
Hunting 52.1
Golfing 50.0
RV Camping 41.5
(33% considered it important)
Cutting firewood 40.5
(29.7% considered it important)
Panning for gold 40.5
(34.1 % considered it important)
Top ten activities of respondents in past year—anywhere in the world (percent of respondents indicating they had done this):
Picnicking 72.3%
Hiking 70.2
Swimming/wading 57.4
Photography 55.3
Walking access to river 50.0
Birdwatching/nature study 38.3
Tent/outdoor camping 30.9
Cutting firewood 27.7
Motor vehicle access to river 26.6
Hunting 25.5
Top ten activities of respondents in past year on the Verde River (percent of respondents indicating they had done this on the Verde River):
Hiking 53.2%
Picnicking 50.0
Walking access to river 35.1
Bank fishing 34.0
Swimming/wading 30.0
Photography 29.8
Bird watching/nature study 27.7
Motor vehicle access 16.0
Canoeing/kayaking 09.6
Cutting firewood 08.5
What activities should take precedence over private property rights (percent of respondents thinking these activities should take precedence):
Walking access to river 30.9%
Hiking 29.8
Birdwatching/nature study 23.4
Picnicking 21.3
Rafting 20.2
Photography 19.1
Canoeing/kayaking 18.1
Flycasting 12.8
Bankfishing 12.5
Sketching/painting 11.7
The Verde River Corridor experiences chronic overuse (percent of respondents favoring/opposing the following):
Favoring Opposing
Fees for selected uses or areas 68.1% 22.4%
Limiting parking at frequently used areas 66.0 14.8
Reservations for selected uses or areas 66.0 22.3
Developing access points far from popula-
tion centers and restricting those closer 62.7 21.3
Restricting publicity about the area to
potential visitors or tourists 31.9 43.6
VERDE RIVER VISUAL ASSESSMENT
Citizens have become concerned about the changing character of the Verde Valley. People are being attracted in increasing numbers to the natural wonders of the area. They seek out its recreational amenities as tourists or retirees. Concern about change, especially the degradation of the natural beauty of the valley, resulted in the initiation of the Visual Assessment as a special study in support of the VRCP. The primary purpose of the Visual Assessment was to identify and evaluate the perceived scenic quality of the river corridor. Edward Cook, William Whitmore, and Frederick Steiner of the Department of Planning, College of Architecture, Arizona State University (ASU), conducted the Visual Assessment study during the Fall of 1990 with participation by local citizens. The results of the process support many of the VRCP recommendations and suggest incorporation of visual and aesthetic considerations into future management decisions. Following is William Whitmore's summary of the assessment and the results.
In addition to the tangible benefits of recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, commercial and other economic activity, the Verde River is a significant scenic resource. The visual assessment process resulted in an evaluation of the relative scenic quality within a larger context and documentation of areas that have special significance to Verde Valley residents. The process involved participants from the Verde Valley as well as researchers from ASU. It was determined that three methods of visual assessment would be used to involve different groups and address varied perspectives. These three methods included: 1) expert evaluation, 2) public valuation, and 3) public nomination of areas of high scenic value or significance.
Visual assessment, because it involves individual perceptions of aesthetics, is generally considered to be subjective. It is said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; however, this study illustrates that, at least in the case of the Verde Valley, people generally agree on what they behold to be most beautiful and what they consider most unattractive. In this study, several methods and different groups were used to reduce the potential for subjectivity and to identify those areas that are clearly most preferred to behold. The expert evaluation process was conducted by faculty and students of environmental planning and landscape architecture from ASU. The public valuation process was conducted by the same group from ASU, but it incorporated public involvement. Verde Valley residents indicated preferences in scenic quality in a series of structured workshops. The public nomination process was coordinated by ASU and Arizona State Parks, and Verde Valley residents participated by nominating areas of scenic quality with little formal direction.
The area included in the visual assessment is the same as that of VRCP, from Tapco to Beasley Flat along the river corridor. The assessment was conducted from the perspective of river corridor users, meaning that the primary orientation points or viewpoints were from within the corridor itself. This narrowed the scope of the assessment slightly from the broader VRCP. The VRCP considered adjacent lands because they are linked with other resource issues with stronger social or economic implications. Background views, however, were included as part of the visual assessment. As a result, the larger corridor was considered but only as it relates visually from the river itself.
Composite Findings
The original intent of this project was to combine all three methods into a composite map. However, once the three segments were complete, it was decided that such a combination would be artificial and yield no new useful information. The individual results from each of the methods yielded distinct findings interesting in their own right.
The findings were:
The expert method evaluates the scenic quality by rating the area's landscape characteristics and relating them to the surrounding physiographic region. This method, as applied in this study, was adapted from the method used by BLM resource managers for assessing the scenic quality of lands under their jurisdiction. It is a systematic process that is used to manage the visual resource of public lands. Both the BLM method and a similar method used by the FS were developed by R. Burton Litton (1968), a University of California—Berkeley professor of landscape architecture. They are widely used whenever an expert evaluation is called for in a visual assessment.
The landscape of the Verde River, with flowing water, significant riparian vegetation, and rock outcroppings set in the backdrop of Verde Formation limestone is unique when evaluated in the context of the arid uplands typical of the Central Highlands province. This rarity by BLM criteria resulted in 83 of 99 scenic reaches receiving scenic classification A, and suggests much of the river corridor is highly valued for its scenic quality. The relatively few areas receiving lower scenic rating did so because of substantial cultural modifications that offset the high scenic quality of the surrounding natural environment.
Respondents in the public valuation portion of the study showed the most preference for the region's geologic structure in combination with a well developed riparian forest and emergent marsh edges along the river's course. These landscapes were void of cultural modifications and exhibited strong contrast in form, texture, and color between landscape elements. These areas have a high degree of enclosure and mystery.
Preferred landscapes are natural in character with minimal natural disturbances or cultural modification. The landscapes created by the river's fluvial process, such as cut banks, were considered scenic as well. Water surfaces are open, smooth, and reflective. A well developed riparian forest edge is present but contrast between landscape elements is lower. Enclosure is moderate with open end views.
Landscapes for which no clear preference is exhibited are typically culturally modified landscapes such as hillside homes and mini-farms. Modifications also include bank stabilization, remnant light structures, and miscellaneous items such as power lines, lawns, fences, aggregate stock piles, and junk scrap. These river segments have degraded riparian edges and enclosure is moderate.
The least preferred landscapes are typically culturally modified to the extent that the alteration is dominant over the surrounding natural landscape. These include heavy structures such as bridges, mining apparatus, mill tailings, and the Tapco substation. Day use recreation and agricultural fields also are ranked low on the preference scale. These cultural landscapes contrast sharply and are inharmonious with the surrounding natural landscape. The river's edge is highly degraded, and enclosure is low.
Public nominations of the river's scenic quality encouraged the respondents to reflect on the river's landscape as a whole by reflecting on experiential perceptions. This personal interaction creates landscape preferences that transcends pure visual aesthetics. The entire river corridor received the largest number of nominations. This indicates a strong interest in preserving the free-flowing characteristics of the river and the adjacent riparian edge from increased cultural degradation.
The river segment between Tapco and Dead Horse Ranch State Park was credited with easy access and many recreational opportunities. Most nominations indicated the surrounding area's beauty, presence of wildlife, and views of cliff dwellings and Tuzigoot National Monument as important factors contributing to the enjoyment of the area.
Between Middle Verde and Camp Verde river access is not as easy. This lack of accessibility, however, is considered a positive factor to the respondents partaking in nature activities such as hiking, canoeing, horseback riding, and wildlife observation.
Casual day use areas around Camp Verde and the confluence of Oak Creek are mentioned because of the sand beaches and slow current amenable to use by families with small children and by the elderly.
Recommendations
This study indicates that the scenic quality of the Verde Valley is high. Its beauty is significant to those who are attracted there to live as well as those who visit the area from elsewhere. The high scenic quality is significant regionally and statewide. It contributes to economic development as a factor in tourism, recreation, and retiree settlement. But beyond economic value, the visual nature of the Verde landscape is important to the quality of the lives of the Valley residents and of all Arizonans who seek the wide open spaces of the American West.
Two types of recommendations can be offered based on this study. The first can be categorized as house cleaning. These actions would enhance the appearance of the river corridor and include:
• Use indigenous plant materials for bank stabilization efforts so that they blend with natural surroundings.
• Screen unsightly land uses from the river by revegetating riparian areas.
• Mine the slag dome for aggregate to eliminate this visual scar and bridge abutments.
• Clear river of all trash and large items such as cars.
• Bridges, such as Tuzigoot Bridge, should be painted pastel colors that are harmonious with the background geology.
• Facilities such as trash receptacles, fire pits, restrooms, etc. should be located at heavily used day use recreation sites. Well marked permanent access roads should be established to prevent the wandering of vehicles over the natural landscape.
• Improve river access at bridge locations to provide ingress and egress for water activities. This will provide dependable access points at regular intervals along the river which will discourage the more random access habits now in practice which degrade the shoreline landscapes as illustrated in day use recreation landscapes.
• Remove aggregate stock piles from point bars and revegetate.
• Remove abandoned heavy equipment and buildings near unused mining pits. These pits, if reclaimed and revegetated, will not only increase in scenic preference but can provide recreation opportunities as well as expanding wildlife habitat.
The second category of recommendations involve government actions. State and local governments should consider:
• the purchase of permanent scenic easements or fee-simple purchase of the landscapes identified as most preferred by the public;
• the adoption of design standards to protect views and to integrate new development into the existing landscape;
• the inclusion of highly rated landscape types in all management and planning decisions;
• maintaining instream flows within the river channel required to support the aquatic and riparian habitats needed for preserving scenic quality;
• the support of ongoing educational efforts about the scenic quality of the Verde Valley directed toward residents, tourists, and potential tourists, and
• the implementation of further research about the interrelationships among nature, culture, and aesthetics.
Scenic easements especially merit serious consideration. Easements have been used in other parts of the nation, such as the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia, to protect views. There are two strengths of easements. First, they are a permanent protection measure. Second, private property rights can be maintained, and private property owners can receive financial benefits. The new Arizona Heritage Fund provides the source of funding to purchase such easements.
Easements are but one option, which certainly could be used as part of more comprehensive efforts. Some action in whatever form is necessary. The Verde Valley is a beautiful place. That beauty is fragile. If the Verde Valley is visually despoiled, the negative consequences to the local quality of life and to the economy would be substantial.