Improvement of accuracy of different automatic visitor counting devices to monitor cyclists in conservation areas

Abstract

Conservation area managers face increasing challenges in balancing nature-based tourism with environmental protection, as visitor activities diversify and tourism grows in recreational and protected areas. To address this, effective visitor monitoring is crucial for identifying spatial and temporal hotspots of use and potential conflicts that could threaten conservation goals. In this context, a field test on a mountain bike trail near Villach compared the functionality of two automatic visitor counting technologies: an infrared counter and a magnetometer. A wildlife camera recorded videos of passing mountain bikers, serving as the “ground-truth” for the experiment. The infrared counter, detecting infrared wavelengths emitted by people or animals, and the magnetometer, sensing metal parts of bicycles, were evaluated for accuracy. Over 28 days, the wildlife camera recorded 4,004 cyclists. The magnetometer undercounted by 9.6%, while the infrared counter undercounted by 32.8%, with increasing inaccuracy on busy days. A linear regression model provided correction factors, with the magnetometer showing higher prediction accuracy. The study suggests that the magnetometer is more reliable for counting cyclists, but both technologies suffer accuracy issues with higher visitor traffic. Wildlife cameras, while useful, require careful data management and privacy considerations. Future tests could focus on differentiating between hikers and cyclists using these technologies on shared trails.