Methodology ROS

The methodology for this recreation opportunity spectrum model was divided into four distinct
maps: a physical, a social, a managerial setting, and a ROS class map. The first map created was the
physical setting map which relied on two main factors: remoteness of the area and the existence of
human modifications which would include elements of the built environment such as hydro/electric
lines, railways, trails, dams, lodges, and settlements.84 This map also used size as a constraint because
an area had to be a certain size in order to support recreation activities; these size constraints and the
identification of human modifications led to the discovery of a variety of recreation opportunities
within the two test sites.85 The physical setting map for Pukaskwa is below in figure 7

The social setting map was second and this map was more user-oriented. This map looked at
the density of people in different areas of the two parks based on park statistics. These areas were
chosen based on their encounter norms, with the lowest likelihood of encounter occurring at the
wilderness end of the spectrum and the highest likelihood of encountering other people at the urban
end of the spectrum.86 This second map for Pukaskwa is shown in figure 8 below.

The fourth map, the ROS class map, determines recreation opportunities through overlaying

the social, physical, and managerial setting maps. This final ROS class map for Pukaskwa is shown

below in figure 10 and is the descriptive means of determining recreation opportunities.88

Tourism potential was determined by reconciling and analyzing the differences that result from

the process of overlaying the settings maps. The concept of tourism potential was also addressed

through using the three factors of the likelihood of encounter, remoteness of the ROS area, and the

amount of human modifications present. If the area in question was identified as having a low

possibility of encountering people while hiking then this area would have a high, untapped tourism

potential. As well, the remoteness of the area identified and the level of human (landscape)

modifications play a role in assessing potential of the area. The ROS model determines potential by

using three levels, front country, backcountry-low access and backcountry-high access opportunity

areas. Front country areas are close to settlements with substantial amounts of human modifications and

are not as pleasing to tourists. Backcountry-low access areas, however have desired features but have

accessibility barriers. Lastly, there are backcountry-high access areas that are less remote than low

access areas and buffer front country areas from backcountry-low access regions. The happy medium is

to have a remote area that is accessible and has little in the way of human modifications and thus has

potential that has not been realized.