The study was conducted at 9 beaches along the New Jersey side of Delaware Bay from Villas Beach north to Fortescue Beach (Figure 1). The habitat was generally shallow sandy beaches, with extensive mudflats and sandy shoals at low tide. Some beaches were bordered by salt marshes, while other beaches were bordered by roads or houses. Many of the beaches were accessible by driving to the end of a suburban street, while others were accessible by driving on dirt roads through salt marshes. Stewards were assigned to all 9 beaches from morning (about 0900 to 1700, depending upon the beach), and personnel. Visitors, however, were interviewed from 0600 to 1900, depending on their presence and weather (see below).

From 10 May 2021 until 10 June 2021, we interviewed 279 people who visited 9 beaches on the New

Jersey side of Delaware Bay. Interviews were conducted by trained personnel, and pilot interviews were completed prior to implementation of the study. Two people were dedicated to interviews during the study period, and normally conducted interviews from 6 am to dusk each day. To avoid bias in the selection of people to interview, the interviewers asked the first person to approach the beach if they could be interviewed; upon completion of that interview, the next new person to arrive at the beach was interviewed. Since many of the access points are at the end of a road, it was easy to determine who had just arrived. To obtain interviews from all beaches, interviewers normally remained at a given beach for 3 - 4 hours, and then moved on to another, pre-determined the night before to achieve both coverage of the different beaches, while optimizing the number of people interviewed. Interviewers introduced themselves and explained they were conducting a study for American Littoral Society and Rutgers University, as well as that no individual identifiers (e.g. name, address) were asked, and that data would be combined into categories. Refusal rate was low (less than 8%) and was largely due to time constraints or presence of children.

The interview instrument was similar to other forms used in the past, although the questions themselves differed [20]. The interview form was a page long, and contained information on demographics (age, gender, number of people in the group), home community, visitation rates, and open-ended questions on why they came, whether they felt stewards helped, how stewards helped, and what kinds of information interviewees would like from stewards. It also contained rating questions on the importance of stewards, stewards who could provide information, and about research on shorebirds and crabs. Open-ended questions were asked early during the interview to solicit free and unbiased answers, and rating questions of provided choices were placed later on the questionnaire.

The interview itself required anywhere from 15 minutes to 45 minutes, depending upon whether people wanted to talk about the issues or ask questions. Questions were answered at the end of the interview to prevent bias in the answering of questions that were later on the interview form. People often wanted to express other thoughts about the stewardship program, or the shorebirds or crabs, or both—resulting in very long interviews.

Rating questions used a Likert Scale of 1 - 5, where 1 is the lowest value and 5 is the highest value (e.g., the highest rating). Differences among categories were determined by Chi-Square tests where appropriate, and we distinguished the differences using Duncan Test [36].

In parallel, we had the stewards ask only a limited number of questions that were similar to those on our survey. We wanted to see whether key questions could be asked by stewards, even considering the biases involved with stewards asking about stewards in general, as well as other features. We present these results only in passing as a potential method of obtaining information with personnel already on these sites. None of the people interviewed by the stewards were interviewed for our overall study. We expected that the stewards would only ask receptive people if they could interview them with a very short form.

Of those interviewed, 47% were female, and 53% were male. Average group size was 2 ± 0.09. Of those interviewed, 8% were under 30 years of age, 20% were 31 - 45, 31% were 46 - 60, and 41% were over 60 years. The average age was 54 ± 0.09 years. Fewer than 30 people had children with them. The people interviewed mainly self-identified as white (81%); others identified as Latin/Hispanic (7%), Black (5%), and Asian (4%); the rest self-identified as other.

Most people had visited the Delaware Bay beaches before (77%), while it was the first time for 23% of the visitors. Most visitors visited 1 - 5 times during the year (64%), another 21% visited 6 - 10 times a year, and the rest came more often (usually locals). Many people came to the Bay beaches for several years (mean of 16 + 1 years). 55% have been coming for up to 10 years, with another 20% coming for 11 - 20 years, the time the shorebirds have received considerable media attention.

Visitor type refers to the reason why people came to this beach. The “shorebirds” category are only visitors who said they came to watch birds, shorebirds or red knots; for “horseshoe crabs” it is the group of people who said they came to see or learn about horseshoe crabs. “Shorebirds and crabs” refers to people who mentioned that they came to see both. “Recreation and other” is a broad category that included walking, photographing, letting children play, and looking for Cape May diamonds and beach glass. A few people mentioned they liked to turn over crabs when there was no one telling them not to.

While many assume that people are mainly drawn to these beaches because of the shorebirds, there are actually a number of reasons why people come during the shorebird migration season (Table 1). There are two ways to determine this, including open-ended questions (why did you come here), and a choice questions (pick the primary reason you came from a list they were given). There was remarkable congruence between the answers to these two types of questions that were located far apart on the interview. That almost the same percentage of people volunteered that they came for shorebirds and/or crabs whether it was an open-ended question, or whether it was a choice of options question demonstrates there is internal consistency in how people are answering the question. In the rest of the paper, we use the primary reasons as the designation for visitor types. What makes this beach attractive goes partly to the other aspects of the beach—is it a pleasant and tranquil scene, for example.

Visitor type varied by gender (Figure 2, X² = 21.9, df = 6, P < 0.001). In general, men came for recreation and fishing more than did women (23% vs 10%), and more women came to see crabs than did men (13% vs 2%). However, the percentages that came to see shorebirds, or both crabs and shorebirds, were similar.

When asked whether they visited other beaches, people responded as follows. 1) 67% said they go to other beaches to watch birds, 2) 40% said they go to other beaches to watch crabs, and 3) only 12% said they go to other Delaware Bay beaches to fish. Indeed, interviewers reported that they saw people they had interviewed at other beaches, sometimes on the same day, and sometimes on different days.

At the end of the survey, we asked what organizations they belonged to (and if they asked for clarification we said, for your interests). This provided an indication of environmental activity. Well over half of the people did not belong to any organizations (157 people, 56%), and another 8% (22 people) did not answer. The organizations people belonged to were largely local or regional, such as Audubon Society (National and state), Cape May Bird Observatory, Nature Conservancy, and Sierra Club.

The main objective of this paper is to examine the perceptions of visitors to the Delaware Bay shorebird beaches about stewards, and interviewees were asked about their perceptions in both open-ended questions and by rating questions. Several different questions on the survey addressed whether people thought the stewards were helpful (Table 2). There were no gender or age-related differences in responses to the questions in Table 2 (X² tests).

These results are instructive in that most people answered the question about whether stewards helped, but not about whether they provided conservation value; 33% did not want to answer whether they provide conservation value. Similarly, 22% chose not to answer the question about relying on stewards for information. Still, of those that did answer, over half of the people thought stewards helped, and 86% thought stewards provided conservation value. These questions were open-ended, and people could say what they wanted—they answered with short answers. For comparison, 96% of 274 interviewees said shorebirds should be protected, 87% of 273 interviewees said crabs should be protected. The latter two questions were after the question about whether stewards helped—thus it was not the location of the question on the questionnaire that influenced answers.

Another method of evaluating stewards was by rating questions, where people were asked to rate stewards and other measures on a scale of 1 - 5 (although many people answered 0, these were considered a 1). The interviewers were not physically close to stewards during interviews, and the answers were confidential (Table 3). Interviewees were asked to rate a number of characteristics about Delaware Bay, including the importance of stewards (Table 3). People rated the protection of shorebirds the highest, followed by research on migrant shorebirds. The importance of stewards (and stewards who can provide information) was rated significantly lower than the questions about shorebirds and crabs (Table 3). These findings are robust because the whole data set is used (e.g., 279 participants, note the low standard error).

It is clear from Table 3 that most people, regardless of why they came, did not rate the stewards as highly as they rated protection of shorebirds and research on shorebirds. Further, as was clear from Table 3, many people did not choose to even rate them, and others said they did not know what they were or did not ever see them. The latter two responses are interesting since the questions about stewards were positioned at different places on the survey form—thus it was not a case of people getting tired and not wanting to answer the question (some just did not answer although they answered later questions).

Whether people felt that stewards helped (in their experience) also varied by the type of visitor (Table 4). People whose primary reason for coming was scenery and tranquility were significantly more likely to

a: A relatively small sample size.

have spoken to a steward, and to think stewards helped (conservation), but less likely to rate the importance of stewards as high (rating of 4 or 5) as other visitor types. People interested in the shorebirds and crabs (and crabs alone) rated the importance of having stewards who can provide information similarly to others. Further, in Table 4, the lack of as high a significance level in Table 3 is partly due to the smaller sample size of each category. That is, the total sample size for visitors is 279 (divided among the 6 types of visitors), while in Table 3, the whole sample of visitors answered each question.

Most people declined to say why they rated stewards low, if they did so. Those that did answer said things like—“they don’t respect locals”, “they are not doing their job”, “they are too bossy”, “they make me leave”, and “I didn’t see them”. Some people expressed a desire “to see them”, and be “able to ask questions”.

Another method of examining perceptions of the importance of stewards is using the ratings as a function of visitor type (Table 5). The different types of visitors rated how important stewards are, and how important stewards who can provide information are. Oddly, people who said they came to see red knots, shorebirds, or birds, and horseshoe crabs rated the importance of stewards lower than did people who came to fish, see the scenery, or see both shorebirds and crabs (with this type of question, a P < 0.1 is often considered significant). This suggests that people who come to see the birds or the crabs do not value the stewards as highly as others. There was no significant difference in how important it was to have stewards who can provide information. If stewards are present, everyone wants them to be able to provide information.

Age was another factor that influenced how people rated the presence of stewards who could provide information (Table 6, X² = 20.6, df = 12, P < 0.05). The mean rating for the importance of stewards who can provide information increased significantly with age. The markedly lower rating of people under 30 may reflect their greater reliance on the internet for information.

Gender also influenced the relative ratings of some aspects examined in this survey (Table 7). Females had a significantly higher rating for the importance of stewards, and protection of birds than did males, while males rated the importance of fishing higher than did females. There were no significant gender differences in the other aspects examined. However, except for fishing, females rated all aspects higher than males. Clearly, there were no gender differences in their view of whether there should be research on migrant shorebirds and horseshoe crabs.

People also were asked what information they would like the stewards to provide. This was an open-ended question, and people could answer in any way they liked (Table 8). The full detail on the answer is presented because it can indicate the kinds of information that a stewardship program can address and consider providing in written form.

These data indicate 23% of people did not answer the question, and another 28% did not feel they needed information, or wanted information about the shorebirds and crabs. Among visitors there was a lack of information even about the presence of the stewards. Half of the people wanting information inquired where the shorebirds were currently feeding (e.g., what other Delaware Bay beach), or about shorebird migration and behavior. Far fewer wanted to know about the crabs, and even fewer wanted to know anything about the general ecology or other species living along the Delaware Bay shore. This provides an indication of the education potential for stewards (see below).

Understanding who the visitors are, why they come, and how often they come is essential information for management of the beaches during the shorebird migration season. The data from interviewing 279 people indicate that 60% of the visitors come to the Delaware Bay beaches in NJ to see the red knots, other shorebirds, and/or horseshoe crabs. The others come mainly for recreation and fishing, and the scenery and tranquility the beaches offer. Some people drive to the beach, and merely sit in their cars gazing at the bay, the boats, the birds, and the vegetation.

The data in the present study illustrate that asking the same question in different ways (e.g., open-ended, choice, ratings) provide a clearer picture of the factors motivating people to visit these shorebird beaches. We found that the initial reason people stated for coming (e.g., shorebirds, crabs, scenery) was often the main reason they wanted to visit beaches, but their reasons for choosing a particular beach were often different. That is, they may have come to see shorebirds, to fish, or to see crabs, but the reason that they came to a specific beach often was for tranquility or scenery. This illustrates the importance of asking questions in different ways to understand the complexity of their motivations, and potential for education. If people come to a beach for tranquility, then managers need to maintain this aspect, which often means keeping visitors to a minimum (or managing noise and confusion), not having overdevelopment, and providing individual access. For some people the latter meant having no one between them and the crabs or birds (even when the birds were quite far away); they did not want to look over someone else’s shoulder (although a thin rope at waist height was acceptable).

Many people did not feel they were disturbing the birds, which was a similar finding to LeCorre et al. [19]. They reported that the people interviewed put forth several different arguments to support their lack of effect on local bird populations. Our data, and those of LeCorre et al.’s [19], suggest that specific educational materials should be developed for each user group (see 5.3 below).

One of the main goals of the study was to determine the perceptions of people interviewed about the beach stewards, what types of information visitors would like, and what makes the beach more or less attractive. Both open-ended questions (people could say anything they wanted) and more structured questions were asked. The data indicate that 58% of those interviewed said the stewards helped, and 86% of those who answered the question said the stewards provided conservation value. However, 33% of the people interviewed did not answer whether stewards provided conservation value, and 40% of those interviewed said they rely on them for information. These data suggest that a significant proportion of people interviewed felt stewards were helpful, but many said maybe, I don’t know, and no. Further, 22% didn’t even answer the question about relying on stewards for information, and 56% of those that did answer, said no.

In light of these observations, it seems that many people feel the stewards are helpful both to themselves and for the birds, but others do not. Many people mentioned that they never saw stewards or did not know what they were, and others flatly said they were not helpful. Many felt the stewards were very helpful, and these views can be used to improve the stewardship program. Clearly, additional training of stewards, raising the awareness of visitors that there are stewards present, and encouraging both stewards and the public to interact are essential to a stewardship program and to shorebird conservation (see Antos et al. [45]). Additional training, funds, and visual/communication aids should be developed (see below).

Some people who visited several beaches (but were interviewed only during their first visit), later noted that the knowledge base varied greatly among stewards, as did the attitudes of the stewards. That the public can notice these differences suggests that stewardship programs can benefit from self-evaluations and group-evaluations where stewards share with one another (see below).

Human activities that disturb foraging or breeding activities can have an adverse effect on shorebirds [13 , 35 , 38 , 41]. Identifying ways that human disturbances can be reduced is thus an important management goal. Beach stewards can play a key role in any management strategy but understanding the perceptions and incorporating the needs of beach users is critical [13 , 38 , 42]. Stewards have a unique opportunity to provide information to visitors to Delaware Bay during the shorebird migration season. The program

has proven successful in that the majority of red knots, a species known to be sensitive to disturbance, used beaches protected by stewards in NJ. Delaware Bay beaches in Delaware do not restrict public access to beaches used by red knots. It is important for stewards to recognize how important they can be not only as ambassadors of the shorebird-crab managers and scientists, but to the functioning of the shorebird stopover, the overall ecosystem of the Bay, and the conservation of the system. This message of value should be transmitted clearly to the stewards through intensive steward training and in materials provided to the public. One of the main objectives of the study was to find out the perceptions of visitors with the hope of using the information to improve the program.

Many of the visitor’s suggestions dealt with where or when were stewards present, others dealt with information needs, while still others dealt with logistics (where can I park, how do I know it’s alright to park here, and where is the bathroom?). These are addressed easily, but stewards should know where the closest place is that visitors can buy a bottle of water or cup of coffee and find a restroom. Informing the stewards about the issues mentioned in Table 9 is as critical as having them there. They are the ambassadors for the local, state and regional conservation and resource managers, and they should be treated with upmost respect and appreciation—just as the visitors should. We note that there were three kinds of recommendations from visitors: 1) Lack of knowledge of steward or complains about them, 2) Quests for more information, and 3) Questions about how they can become involved or help (Table 9). We add a fourth that comes from our conversations with them and from the data (Table 10).

Many of the above conclusions and suggestions mandate that stewards receive more detailed and clear training prior to the season, the tools to identify themselves, information brochures to provide to the public, and adequate chairs, story boards or whatever is essential to provide information to the full range of people from those visiting for the first time to those people familiar with the shorebird migration-crab spawning spectacle. It also requires that stewards be there consistently (and post when they are taking breaks and when they will be back).

Other recommendations come from the interactions of the interviewers with people visiting the beach. Particular questions often elicited responses way beyond the survey itself. Further, at the end of the survey, informal conversations provided additional insights for improving the stewardship program (Table 10). On a personal note, the senior author found that nearly everyone was willing to be interviewed, and the more relaxed and open she was, the more people wanted to know more about the knots, shorebirds, threats they faced, and the Bay in general. The better trained and knowledgeable the stewards, the better communication will be. The importance of steward’s understanding the different reasons people come is critical because people who came for reasons other than shorebirds and crabs were quite interested and wanted more information about the shorebirds, if encouraged. This group of visitors could be shown the importance of the beach and its protection for the shorebirds that are truly an international treasure, as well as being threatened. The stewards are in a unique position to greatly influence the visitors to Delaware Bay, improve their knowledge, and further the conservation of the Bay ecosystem.

Finally, our recommendations are aimed at improving the stewardship program at beaches where shorebirds and other coastal birds forage. The stewards, however, are the public face of the stewardship program. It is critical to remember that planning, implementation, funding, and logistical support for the program needs to be provided and sufficient so that all the stewards at each beach are equally prepared themselves and armed with education tools to enhance the public’s understanding of not only the shorebird and crab interactions, but the health and well-being of the Delaware Bay ecosystem.