State Parks: A Diverse System

State Park Information Resources Center

State Park Research Report 00-1 Department of Recreation & Park Administration, Indiana University

State Parks: A Diverse System by Daniel D. McLean, Indiana University; Deborah Chavez, Pacific Southwest Research Station, USFS; Amy Hurd, Indiana University This paper was presented at the 2000 Symposium on Social Aspects of Recreation Research at Tempe, AZ, February, 2000.

Abstract: America’s state park systems represent an important and diverse component of the outdoor recreation estate. The mission of state parks is to provide close-to-home resource-based outdoor recreation opportunities at a moderate cost (Landrum, 1999b). The 50 state park systems represent 5,870 areas including 12.6 million acres and a reported 739 million visits in 1996 (Eagles, et. al., in press). State parks play a significant role within the total outdoor recreation estate. They are positioned at a unique juncture between the federal and local level providing outdoor recreation resources and opportunities that might not be otherwise available. This paper looks at the unique contributions that state parks make to the total recreation estate, how the state park estate has changed over the last 10 years, and suggests future challenges and directions. The findings suggest a steady if not a dramatic growth in state park administered areas and acreage. State parks may, as some have suggested, represent a mature system. Further, it would appear that there is as much diversity as there is commonality among state park operations. It is not easy to define a “state park” conforming to a single set of attributes. Rather they are individualistic and unique in many cases to a particular state, region, or purpose. The term “state park” holds special significance among people and will continue to do so.

Introduction At the most recent meeting of the National Association of State Park Directors (NASPD) Ney Landrum, immediate past Executive Director and former Florida State Park Director, spoke on the nature of state parks stating, “State parks are characterized as much by their differences as by their similarities. State parks copy themselves in lots of ways, but there are tremendous differences from state to state” (Landrum, 1999b). The diversity in state park systems has long been recognized among state park STATE PARKS: A DIVERSE SYSTEM

directors, but little talked about beyond their small community. Knowledge of the types of areas that exist among the states has been poorly documented. Studies within states have provided a micro-insight. A macro-view of state park systems has not been frequently reported. The purpose of this paper is to identify the diversity and richness of the types of areas available, and suggest future trends of state parks in the provision of areas for a burgeoning outdoor recreation market. 1

Methodology The Annual Information Exchange (AIX), published by the NASPD, is the primary source of statistical data dealing exclusively with state parks. It is principally available to state park directors and researchers. Data has been collected and reported annually since 1979, but only in a consistent format since 1991. The AIX survey instrument secures data for 7 areas: 1) inventory of areas; 2) types of facilities; 3) visitation and use; 4) capital improvements; 5) financing; 6) personnel; and 7) support groups. Data gathered from the AIX was analyzed over a 10 year period and focused on the inventory of areas. Data from individual states was accomplished through a convenience sample utilizing available printed marketing materials, annual reports, system wide brochures, various reports, and world wide web based materials. Various state reporting procedures and sophistication of individual state reporting processes have a significant influence on the availability and variability of data. As one state park director stated, “The data we provide the Annual Information Exchange is different from what we provide the state legislature.” While this is not a common problem, nonetheless it is an important issue in the collection and interpretation of the AIX and collateral materials.

The State Park Estate Cordell (1999) reported that 94.5 percent of American’s participated in outdoor recreation in 1994. In the same report he stated the list of outdoor recreation pursuits were getting long and more diverse. Eagles, McLean, and Stabler (in press) noted total outdoor recreation participations reported by Federal outdoor recreation and land managing agencies and state park administered areas in 1996 to be 2,506,451,728 (see Table 1). Of that number 739,981,628 visited 2

state park administered areas, accounting for 29.5% of total national outdoor recreation usage. By number of visitors, however, the state park estate ranks second, only behind the USDA Forest Service (Eagles, et. al., in press). Yet, state parks rank fifth in the provision of acreage for outdoor recreation (1.9%), behind USDA Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service (Cordell, 1999). It appears that state parks play an extraordinary role in the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities far in excess of the size of areas they manage. Landrum (1999a) stated the mission of state parks is to provide “resource-based outdoor recreation opportunities to the public at modest cost” (p. 113). He further characterizes state parks as a mature “comprehensive nation wide movement” (p. 114). In its maturity state parks continue to be an evolving and diverse system. The AIX provides a source of trend data as well as an annual snapshot of state park Table 1: Visitor Days Resource Management Agency

Visitation in 1996 (Visitor Days)

Percent of Total

National Park Service Areas

295,000,000

11.75%

USDA Forest Service Areas

849,182,000

33.82%

Bureau of Land Management

123,611,000

4.92%

Corps of Engineers

377,477,100

15.03%

National Wildlife Refuges

31,200,000

1.24%

NOAA Marine Reserves

4,500,000

0.18%

Bureau of Reclamation

90,000,000

3.58%

739,981,628

29.47%

2,510,951,728

100.00%

State Parks TOTAL

STATE PARK INFORMATION RESOURCES CENTER - STATE PARK RESEARCH REPORT 00-1

Table 2: Definitions of Types of Areas Type of Area

Definition

State Parks

Areas containing a number of coordinated programs for the preservation of natural and/or cultural resources and provision of a variety of outdoor recreation activities supported by those resources.

State Recreation Areas

Areas where a clear emphasis is placed on the provision of opportunities for primarily active recreation activities-might include recreational beaches, water theme parks, etc.

State Natural Areas

Areas where a clear emphasis is placed on protection, management and interpretation of natural resources or features--might include wilderness areas, nature preserves, natural landmarks, sanctuaries, etc.

State Historic Areas

Areas where a clear emphasis is placed on protection, management and interpretation of historical and/or archaeological resources or features--might include monuments, memorials, shrines, museums, etc., dealing with historical and/or archaeological subjects, as well as areas that actually contain substantive remains (forts, burial mounds, etc.) and areas where historic events took place (battles, discoveries, meetings, etc.).

State Environmental Education Sites

Areas used exclusively or primarily for conducting educational programs on environmental subjects, natural resources, conservation, etc.--might include nature centers, environmental education centers, "outdoor classrooms", etc.

State Scientific Areas

Areas set aside exclusively or primarily for scientific study, observation and experimentation involving natural objects, processes and interrelationships; any other allowable uses are secondary and incidental.

State Forests

Areas that, while under the direct administrative supervision and control of the state parks agency, are identified separately from the state park system and distinguished from state park units by having primarily a forest management and/or timber production role rather than a natural area and/or provision of recreation role.

State Fish/Wildlife Areas

Areas under the administrative supervision and control of the state parks agency that are identified and managed primarily for the propagation and recreational taking of fish and/or game ("fishing and/or hunting areas").

State Trails

Linear areas outside any other unit of the state park system, that provide primarily for trail-type recreational activities (hiking, cycling, horseback riding, etc.) and normally do not contain any land areas large enough to support nontrail activities.

Other Specified Areas

Areas other than the above, that are considered special or significant enough in a particular state to warrant separate identification and treatment.

Miscellaneous Areas

Areas other than the above, that are not easily Categorized or distinguished, or are not considered significant enough to warrant specification--"everything else".

operations. The AIX reports eleven categories of areas, nine of which are distinct and two are collective. The AIX attempts to capture current state data about each type of area. Table 2 depicts each state park administered area by category and their STATE PARKS: A DIVERSE SYSTEM

corresponding definition which was developed by NASPD. The definitions provide a common level of understanding among the state parks and allow for limited comparative analysis.

3

State Park Areas: A Collective View The 1999 AIX reports eleven categories of areas. Table 3 depicts the collective size of each type of area and its percentage of the total state park estate. State parks, as might be expected, represent the largest share of all areas managed by state park agencies (62.6%) with recreation areas a distance second (11.5%). Natural areas rank third with 9.8% of the land area. Environmental education areas (0.12%) ranks just above miscellaneous areas (0.03%) as the smallest percentage of areas managed. Table 4 illustrates the changes in the state park estate, by area, that have occured between 1990 and 1999. Table 3: Areas and Size Category

Size (acres)

Percent of Total Estate

Parks

7,899,808

62.55%

Recreation Areas

1,452,811

11.50%

Natural Areas

1,235,312

9.78%

Historic Areas

93,778

0.74%

Environmental Education Areas

14,925

0.12%

Scientific Areas

10,146

0.08%

Forests

807,742

6.40%

Fish/Wildlife Areas

178,920

1.42%

Other Areas

932,678

7.38%

3,488

0.03%

Miscellaneous Areas Trails (miles) TOTAL

22,842 12,629,608

100.00%

State parks. State parks, by title, are represented in all 50 states, but three states (Idaho, Montana, and Texas) do not report state parks in their AIX data. However, only Alaska and California exceed Texas in total acreage managed. Alaska and California 4

each have more than one million acres in state parks. New York, by contrast has the most state park areas (152) and Nebraska, among those reporting state parks, has the fewest at eight. It might be expected there would be a correlation between the number of state parks and the total acreage managed, this does not appear to be the case. Alaska reported 2.9 million acres of state park land in 1999 (first) and 42 state parks (seventeenth). New York, ranking first with 152 state parks with 279,694 acres of state park land and ranked fourth in total acreage. Pennsylvania ranked second in the number of state parks at 105 and fifth in state park acreage with 268,058 acres. Massachusetts reports 78 state parks (fourth), but only 52,181 acres (thirtieth) and these areas are jointly managed by two different agencies (Massachusetts State Forest and Parks, and the Metropolitan District Commission). Of those state reporting state parks Rhode Island has the least acreage reporting 8,063 acres and 23 state parks. There remains considerable diversity even among areas with the state park classification. For example the eastern central states (Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Illinois) provide the core of resorts in state parks. Kentucky, Ohio, and Oklahoma specifically identify selected state parks as “State Resort Parks.” Kentucky has 17 state resort parks, by far the largest state based resort system in the United States. They provide such amenities as Olympic size pools, conference centers, golf courses, bicycle moto-cross tracks, house boat rentals and the like. Tennessee boasts 11 golf courses with six of them being Jack Nicklaus signature golf courses. California has waysides, agricultural museums, ranches, open space preserves, state beaches, and underwater parks. Such diversity is likely to continue in the future. STATE PARK INFORMATION RESOURCES CENTER - STATE PARK RESEARCH REPORT 00-1

The state park estate has grown at a steady, but not spectacular rate during the 1990s. In 1990 there were 7.3 million acres dedicated to state parks. In 1999 there were 7.9 million acres representing an actual growth of 553,000 acres or an average of 55,000 acres a year (7.6% growth). During the same period the number of state park sites declined from 2,057 to 1,829 (-11.0%). Looking at this data independent of other data can be misleading. Texas, for example, reported state parks through 1996 (163,859 acres) and now reports none. State legislatures in many states reserve the final determination on the classification of areas and may or may not impact upon state park agency operations. State recreation areas. State recreation areas (SRA) provide for a broader range of activities than do some state parks. The use of the term recreation area may influence attendance, types of activities, and behavior by visitors. SRAs are growing at a steady rate, increasing from 528 areas in 1990 to 903 areas in 1999 (71%). Acreage grew slower, at a rate of 17% from 1.2 million acres in 1990 to 1.4 million acres in 1999. Thirty-two states report SRAs with Alaska ranking first with 304,776 acres, California second with 285,939 acres, Texas third with 202,419 acres and Washington fourth with 180,000 acres. Texas and Washington had significant increases in their SRAs. Texas transferred all of its state parks to SRAs while Washington added almost 150,000 new acres in 1994. Alaska reported 118,000 less acres in SRAs in 1999 than in 1990. There is a trend towards more SRAs, but not necessarily significantly more land. The reclassification of existing areas may have been one of the most popular approaches to increasing the number of SRAs. Alaska’s removal of 118,000 acres as SRAs had a dramatic negative impact on the growth of SRAs. Had Alaska not removed the 118,000 acres growth would have been 33.3%. STATE PARKS: A DIVERSE SYSTEM

State Natural Areas. State natural areas (SNA) represent “Areas where a clear emphasis is placed on protection, management and interpretation of natural resources or features—might include wilderness areas, nature preserves, natural landmarks, sanctuaries, etc.” (McLean & Hurd, 1999b). The acreage of SNAs grew by 50% between 1990 (803,133 acres) and 1999 (1,235,312 acres). The number of SNAs increased from 399 to 681 (71%) during the same period. Colorado reported the most SNAs with 218 and ranks third in total acreage at 137,359 acres. Texas ranks eighth in the number of SNAs and first in total acreage with 417,490 acres. Florida has 22 SNAs and 279,980 acres. Thirty-one states report SNAs. SNAs are an area of significant growth among state park administered areas. Excluding trails, SNAs increased on a percentage basis more than any other type of area during the reporting period. This may represent an increased awareness among states and state legislatures of the need to preserve significant natural resources. State Trails. State trails are reported as linear miles. Forty-three states report having state trails, second only to state parks in frequency. States have classified trails as state parks, state trails, or linear parks. Trails are the fastest growing area in state park administered areas. Between 1990 and 1999 state trails grew dramatically increasing from 457 areas to 2,351 areas (414%) and from 11,195 to 22,842 miles (104%). The growth of trails as part of the state park estate mirrors what has occurred at a national and local level. Remaining areas. The remaining seven types of areas account for 16.3% of state park administered acreage. Forests, fish/ wildlife areas, and miscellaneous areas all experienced decreases over the 10 year period. Miscellaneous areas represent a holding category for lands until a disposi5

tion can be made regarding how they should be classified within an existing system. Forests and fish/wildlife areas are traditionally separate divisions in many states. The administrative complexity of state parks, however, is constantly shifting. For example, Maine was merged with the state forestry office during 1999, yet retained its separate identity as a state park managing agency. Scientific areas remained almost constant over the 10 year period growing form 92 to 95 areas and from 9,562 acres to 10,146 acres. Environmental education areas should good growth at 50%, but there are still on 36 such areas across the United States that are administered by state park agencies. Iowa’s Conservation Education Center is typical. It is located adjacent to a state park, has dormitories, cafeteria,

classrooms, and a permanent education staff. They provide environmental education training to youth on and off-site and host special events, conferences, teacher workshops, and other activities.

Roles and Issues Seeking commonality of roles and issues is a challenge when asking 50 independent and diverse systems. The uniqueness of each state’s system can sometimes mitigate against common understanding. State park directors, as a whole, agree on some common roles for their agencies. There appears to be a consensus among state park directors and their organization’s literature suggesting a need to 1) be more accountable, 2) lead efforts to sustain ecosystems, 3) provide outdoor recreation opportunities, 4)

Table 4: Comparative Change in Areas Acreage 1990 to 1999 1990 Category Parks

2,057

Acreage

Areas

Percentage Change

Acreage

Areas

Acreage

7,336,009 1,829

7,899,808

-11.08%

7.69%

Recreation Areas

528

1,184,811

903

1,452,811

71.02%

22.62%

Natural Areas

399

803,138

681

1,235,312

70.68%

53.81%

Historic Areas

508

65,314

510

93,778

0.39%

43.58%

Environmental Education Areas

24

13,690

36

14,925

50.00%

9.02%

a

92

9,562

95

10,146

3.26%

6.11%

Forests

184

981,838

623

807,742

238.59%

-17.73%

a

Fish/Wildlife Areas

551

381,846

378

178,920

-31.40%

-53.14%

a

Other Areas

601

840,685

693

932,678

15.31%

10.94%

b

Miscellaneous Areas

146

32,872

121

3,488

-17.12%

-89.39%

Trails (miles)

457

11,195 2,351

22,842

414.44%

104.04%

5,090

11,649,765 5,869

12,629,608

15.30%

8.41%

Scientific Areas

TOTAL

6

Areas

1999

a

Area not recorded until 1991 AIX

b

Prior to this year "Other" and "Miscellaneous" were jointly recorded

STATE PARK INFORMATION RESOURCES CENTER - STATE PARK RESEARCH REPORT 00-1

ensure cultural protection, 5) focus internally on individuals within the organization, and 6) protect public health and safety while in state park areas. Existing strategic plans, development plans, and public accountability documents support at least a recognition of these roles as important. A number of issues have recently come forth regarding state park operations. Two issues revolve around funding. There is a consensus that the availability of sufficient budget dollars to maintain operations of existing programs, services and facilities will be more difficult to come by. Infrastructure needs are a major concern for most states. A number of states are addressing the capital improvement issue by providing increased funds. The California governor’s budget request for 2001 asks for $150 million for capital improvements. Just a few years ago the governor of Kentucky vetoed the state budget because the legislature failed to provide $100 million for capital improvements in the state parks. He followed the veto with a tour of state parks emphasizing his veto. Increased budget dollars, by contrast, are coming more frequently from entrepreneurial and partnering activities as opposed to the general fund. Increased partnering is becoming more common. A number of states are negotiating for a single source soda provider. Others are turning to corporate sponsors to provide resources that would not be available any other way. The use of friends groups has grown dramatically over the last 10 years and will likely grow even faster over the next 10 years. Many states have insufficient information regarding their users. Bob Reynolds, National Park Service Pacific West Regional Director, echoed the concerns of this issue when he stated, “We have tended to stay in the past and not represent the people we are STATE PARKS: A DIVERSE SYSTEM

becoming” Reynolds, 1999). He went on to say, park agencies “need to establish relevance between parks and all of the people in the United States” (Reynolds, 1999). Finally, urban parks and the provision of programs, areas, and services to an increasingly diverse population will receive increased attention. New York’s third most visited state park is in Harlem. The Commissioner of State Parks, Bernadette Castro states, “It is our most costly park because everyone walks in. It is 49 acres of safe, clean space. It is built on top of four feet of dirt over what was once a sewage treatment plant. The legislature pumped $100 million into this park” (Castro, 1999).

Conclusions and Summary The appearance of commonality among state parks is simultaneously a reality and an illusion. State park systems are as diverse and unique as are the 50 states. They are similar in their mission to preserve unique cultural, historical, and natural resources, and provide recreation opportunities.. It is the uniqueness that stands out among the state parks. Their ability on a state by state basis to provide singular opportunities for visitors. State park systems are experiencing change, but as Landrum has suggested, they appear to be a mature system more likely to respond to change in social demands and expectations than to experience major shifts in mission, size, or services. The diversity of facilities among the state parks is dramatic. State parks are simultaneously historical, cultural, remote places and urban, intensively used, and accessible. The dichotomy among the state park systems may lie in their attempt to represent and preserve the past and the future for their stakeholders. State parks, when compared to the Federal recreation estate play a role far in 7

excess to the size of the areas they manage. Such recognition has not frequently been placed before state park directors, federal land managers, or legislatures. Attendance, over the 10 year study period grew at a steady rate and can be expected to grow similarly. The presence and growth of urban state parks (an area not measured by the AIX) bears watching in the future. This may be an expanding role for state park agencies. The growth of partnerships and nonprofit support organizations, often called friends organizations, will continue to grow. The 1998 and 1999 NASPD Forums focused almost exclusively on partnering and friends groups and how individual states have developed and generated these relationships. In summary, state parks hold a special significance among Americans. They are typically close to home, accessible, provide opportunities frequently unattainable elsewhere, are low cost, and perceived as a unique resources. As the population diversity shifts state parks role has the potential to be even more important as new constituencies are identified and parks are made relevant for them. The future for state parks is bright and its role within the total outdoor recreation estate will continue to be significant.

References Castro, B. (1999) “Public Involvement and Constituency Building.” Meeting Notes, National Association of State Park Directors. Bloomington, IN: State Park Information Resources Center Cordell, H. K. (1999) “Outdoor recreation in American life: A national assessment of demand and supply trends.” Athens, GA: USDA Forest Service SE Forest Experiment Station. Landrum, N. (1999a) “America’s state Parks — An end-of-century assessment.” in Cordell, H. K. (Ed). Outdoor recreation in American life: A national assessment of demand and supply trends. Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing. 8

Landrum, N. (1999b) “A park is a park is a park. . . ” Meeting Notes, National Association of State Park Directors. Bloomington, IN: State Park Information Resources Center. McLean, D. D. , Begley, B., Hurd, A., & Blackman, R. (in press) State parks in the 1990’s: A selective analysis of the Annual Information Exchange. (State Park Research Report 200-2) Bloomington, IN: State Park Information Resources Center. McLean, D. D., and Hurd, A. (1999a) The 1999 Annual Information Exchange: Volume 21. Tucson, AZ: The National Association for State Park Directors. McLean, D. D., and Hurd, A. (1999b) Annual Information Exchange: Definitions. Tucson, AZ: The National Association for State Park Directors. McLean, D. D., and Hurd, A. (1998) The 1998 Annual Information Exchange: Volume 20. Tucson, AZ: The National Association for State Park Directors. McLean, D. D. (1998) America’s state parks: A 1998 status report. Bloomington, IN: State Park Information Resources Center. Reynolds, Bob. (1999) “Public Involvement and Constituency Building.” Meeting Notes, National Association of State Park Directors. Bloomington, IN: State Park Information Resources Center Table 1

About the State Park Information Resources Center The State Park Information Resources Center (SPIRC) is part of the Eppley Institute located within the Department of Recreation and Park Administration at Indiana University. Its purpose is to provide state parks with information and research about their operations. Formed as a partnership with the National Association of State Park Directors the SPIRC gathers annual data for the Annual Information Exchange, manages a web presence for NASPD, promotes web based communication, gathers research from a variety of sources that deal with state parks, publishes research, and disseminates information about state parks to individuals and organizations. The project director for SPIRC is Daniel D. McLean. For more information: State Park Information Resources Center Daniel D. McLean, Ph.D., CLP 1025 E. 7th Street, HPER 133 Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47405-7109 or http://www.indiana.edu/~naspd

STATE PARK INFORMATION RESOURCES CENTER - STATE PARK RESEARCH REPORT 00-1