Transcript Recreation Participation Trends KS
Recreation Participation Trends KS
KDWPT - State Parks US Army Corps of Engineers National Park Service NSGA 2001-2011 youth participation USFS trend data
• Nearly 50 percent of Americans ages six and older participated in outdoor recreation in 2011. That equates to a total of 141.1 million Americans.
• Outdoor recreation reached the
highest participation level in five
years. Outdoor recreation added three million participants in 2011 — a significant improvement over the pas past few years when participation either dropped or remained stagnant.
• In 2011, outdoor participants made 11.5 billion outings — that is 1.4 billion more outings than 2010.
• Almost half of all outdoor enthusiasts participate in outdoor activities at least once per week.
General
Outdoor Foundation Report 2012
Although up,
in 2011.
participation rates among youth ages six to 17 are average annual outings are down from 98 outings per participant in 2010 to 81 outings
• Youth who do not participate in outdoor activities say they are not interested in the outdoors. For
young adults, lack of time is a bigger barrier than lack of interest.
Introducing outdoor recreation and physical activities
early in life has a lasting effect
. Among adults who are current outdoor participants, 82 percent report having a physical education class between the ages of six and 12. Forty-five percent of adult outdoor participants took part in outdoor activities from ages six to 12.
YOUTH
Outdoor Foundation report 2012
As seen in previous reports, participation in outdoor activities is significantly higher among Caucasians than any other ethnicity and lowest and lowest among African Americans.
Although Hispanic Americans have one of the lowest overall outdoor participation rates, those who do participate go outside the most often.
RACE
Outdoor Foundation 2012
Kansas Outdoor Recreation Participation Statistics
Measured as visitation to selected parks
KS State Park Annual Visitation 1998-2012
8000000 7000000 6000000 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Visits 653861466502507242959752482079381057274430680246163867726043412623661065241087254554700457862180826750503 year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
KS State Parks Visitation by Month 2008-2012
1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2012 176804 190504 386777 577671 991394 1162859 993432 791469 591480 382071 290268 215775 2011 142862 154220 276599 491020 869721 1115754 975117 650222 663816 394261 269098 215392 2010 146362 155939 313974 558846 1037494 1184610 1135494 832059 669475 458120 307139 205066 2009 183848 207317 310812 465695 1113612 1223502 1194136 926270 720253 410231 302781 196097 2008 164397 206973 305138 468334 816725 1005788 1230405 830876 625239 403639 270156 196438
5 000 4 500 4 000 3 500 3 000 2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 0
Sand Hills State Park Monthly Visitation 2008 - 2012
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
140 000 120 000 100 000 80 000 60 000 40 000 20 000 0
Hillsdale State Park Monthly Visitation 2008 - 2012
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0
Prairie Spirit Trail State Park Monthly Visitation 2008 - 2012
200 8 200 9 201 0 201 1
USACE Tulsa Dist Visitation 09-2012
3 000 000 2 500 000 2 000 000 1 500 000 1 000 000 500 000 0 visits 09 visits 10 visits 11 visits 12 Toronto Marion John Redmond Fall River Elk City El Dorado Council Grove Big Hill
USACE KC District Visitation 09-2012 2 000 000 1 800 000 1 600 000 1 400 000 1 200 000 1 000 000 800 000 600 000 400 000 200 000 0 visits 09 visits 10 visits 11 visits 12
C
Clinton Lake Kanopolis Lake Melvern Lake Milford Lake Perry Lake Pomona Lake Tuttle Lake Wilson Lake
AVERAGE (All USACE)
500 000 450 000 400 000 350 000 300 000 250 000 200 000 150 000 100 000 50 000 0 visits 09 visits 10 visits 11 visits 12
AVERAGE (Kansas City District) 680 000 660 000 640 000 620 000 600 000 580 000 560 000 540 000 520 000 visits 09 visits 10 visits 11 visits 12
TOTALS (Tulsa District) 350 000 300 000 250 000 200 000 150 000 100 000 50 000 0 visits 09 visits 10 visits 11 visits 12
(400 000) (300 000) (200 000) (100 000) 0
Visitation Change from 2008/09avg to 2011/12 avg
100 000 200 000
Visitation Change 08/09 to 2011/12 Kansas USACE Projects
-400 000 -300 000 -200 000
Council Grove El Dorado Fall River Toronto Milford Lake Elk City Pomona Lake Wilson Lake Big Hill John Redmond Tuttle Lake Kanopolis Lake Perry Lake Melvern Lake Clinton Lake Marion
-100 000 0 100 000 200 000 300 000
Visitation change from 08/09 to 2011/12 by USACE Project and District
-400 000 -300 000 -200 000
Council Grove El Dorado Fall River Toronto Milford Lake Elk City Pomona Lake Wilson Lake Big Hill John Redmond Tuttle Lake Kanopolis Lake Perry Lake Melvern Lake Clinton Lake Marion
-100 000 0 100 000 200 000 300 000
Comparisons between USACE and State Park Visitation at the same project 08/09 to 2011/12 El Dorado Cross Timbers Fall River Eisenhower Elk City Pomona Kanopolis Milford Perry Clinton Tuttle Creek Wilson
(300 000) (200 000) (100 000) 0 100 000 200 000 300 000 State Wilson Tuttle Creek Clinton Perry Milford Kanopoli s Pomona Elk City (130 89 (66 459 (33 436 (17 401 (16 516 2 272 Eisenho wer Fall River Cross Timbers El Dorado 10 432 27 364 29 818 92 835 117 862 163 284 USACE -8 158 -19 722 -213 25 -32 439 17 746 -24 680 8 471 16 153 -54 445 69 145 31 956 81 086
Annual Recreation Visits Kansas' NPS Sites
35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 Year Tallgrass Ft. Larned Ft. Scott Brown v Board Nicodemus 1 2005 17615 31551 25798 18390 28065 2 2006 27260 31512 24269 20926 21441 3 2007 23000 30471 22314 17536 2507 4 2008 20075 21483 25322 16950 2434 5 2009 23713 27443 28544 19228 2978 6 2010 22047 29423 27635 17808 3448 7 2011 17893 26704 26219 16886 2681 8 0 2012 18918 33194 25035 21101 3505
Sample Visitation by Month Kansas Ntl. Park Service Units
6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Ft. Scott Ft. Larned Tallgrass Brown V. Board Nicodemus
Approaches to collecting planning data
Proximity Analysis
AREAS OF FOCUS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Develop a reliable approach to calculate unmet recreation needs Needs assessment requires a measure of the levels of use, which are not adequately available for specific amenities, including trails.
Progress Report on Getting kids outdoors Where are the activity deserts?
What are the impact of drought and budget shortfalls KS River – Flint Hills River Corridor Issues Wetlands
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
◦ ◦ ◦
ACTION ??
Use GIS for inventory, along with agency data on costs and needs New methodologies including trail assessments and counters.
Incorporate campground reservation data into demand models
Strive to implement the environmental literacy plan (with a pursuit/skill component) Show activity deserts by category and city size Physical activity Natural experience Water access Survey on use and preferences should have some focus on drought and recession impacts KS River designated as National Water Trail Special Designation for Flint Hills as a Legacy Conservation Area Wetlands needs will focus on water (or lack of it) and collaborative efforts.
SCORP 2008-9 FOCUS
AREAS OF FOCUS
1. Respond to declining and under-represented participation in outdoor recreation activities by youth, urban and ethnic populations.
2. Communities are lacking non-motorized, shared use transportation/recreation trails.
3. Outdoor Recreation Planning at all levels of supply would be enhanced with improved comparative data.
4. Advocacy, in the form of elevated communication and collaboration with key partners, to advise both the public and policy makers of the values and benefits of outdoor recreation participation to public health and economic vitality is critical.
5. Park and Recreation Agencies need to serve as champions of resource stewardship 6. Strive to supply an adequate level of quality recreation services in a challenging financial period
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ACTION TAKEN
Multiple programs by public and private agencies at all levels: camps, KACEE, KDWPT, USACE. Need info on yours !!!
Status of state’s trails well documented. Will show new and improvements since 2008. KDWPT and Sunflower KS PARK AND REC GIS BEST IN US Started conference on Built Environment ; Now we need to focus on Outdoor Rec Group that meets regularly (e.g. Colo model) A few examples of specific evidence exist (e.g. JCPRD Resource Management – BioDiversity Plan with addition of Biologist to staff.
Level of Service data by City Class
SCORP 2008-9 FOCUS
KRPA Member Survey from 2008-9 Public on-line survey from 2008-9
Surveys: what do we keep, change, focus on?
A Statewide look made possible by the RecFinder Geodatabase
Sid Stevenson, PhD Kansas State University
5073 Parks and park like properties
1500 schools 70 % of parks within cities
18500 Facilities
118 different facility types
850 trails
Shared use, walk-hike only, equine, water, motorized
Urban Walkable (does not include equine special – even though walking maybe allowed)
Trails do not include obvious sidewalks, but tighter classification is needed
Outdoor Amenities generally open to the public and containing space or features conducive to human movement.
Notable Inclusions: Open play areas are not well defined as amenities and are therefore not well represented in the data base. Shelters serve as a substitute as virtually all are adjacent to open play areas. Natatoriums are included due to LWCF eligibility.
Notable Exclusions: High level athletic fields which are not Generally open to the public
Service Area Calculations .5 mile proximity utilizing street network
PA Walkable Trail Access Lawrence Class 7 Statewide 79% 37% 81% 55% 82% 30%
Physical Activity Deserts
Residents of KS Communities Living Within .5 mile Proximity of a Specified Physical Activity Site (by City Class and Limited Demographic Profile) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 % YOUTH in PA SVCA % NWHT in PA_SVCA % WHT in PA_SVCA % in PA_SVCA 0.00
1 0.90
0.87
0.89
0.89
0.10
0.20
2 0.90
0.91
0.90
0.90
0.30
3 0.88
0.84
0.88
0.88
0.40
4 0.81
0.79
0.81
0.82
0.50
Ratio 5 0.73
0.69
0.73
0.72
0.60
0.70
6 0.79
0.77
0.79
0.79
0.80
7 0.82
0.79
0.82
0.81
0.90
8 0.72
0.67
0.72
0.73
1.00
Comparison of Walkable Trail Proximity vs all PA Proximity by City Class
100.0% 80.0%
% Pop within .5 mile of access
60.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0%
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 WTrails_SVCA 4.4
PA_ SVCA 89.
6.8
90.
5.8
88.
13.
82.
19.
72.
32.
79.
55.
81.
34.
73.
Percentage of Population Residing Within .5 miles of Walkable Trail Access By City Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA Trail SVCA 7 24 41 216 921 7474 47638 64949 150 359 701 1573 4704 22923 86530 190652 4.4% 6.8% 5.8% 13.7% 19.6% 32.6% 55.1% 34.1% 30% Average by City Class of Residents Living Within .5 miles of a Physical Activity Site 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA PA_SVCA 134 324 616 1281 3401 18034 70623 137868 150 359 701 1573 4704 22923 86530 190652 89.0% 90.0% 88.0% 82.0% 72.0% 79.0% 81.0% 73.0% 81.8%
Growing Communities With Trails All KS Communities Comparison of Walkable Trail Proximity vs all PA Proximity by City Class
100.0% 80.0%
% Pop within .5 mile of access
60.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0%
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 WTrails_SVCA 4.4
PA_ SVCA 89.
6.8
90.
5.8
88.
13.
82.
19.
72.
32.
79.
55.
81.
34.
73.
Proximity changes 2000-2010 Proximity to nature based experiences GoPlayKS searchable interface
Mobile apps (I’m here – where’s the activity?)
User generated content (ratings, sharing, etc..) Defining unmet needs statewide
SCORP planning
Table 2 Comparison of Statewide Urban Trail needs to reach Service Level of 90% within .5 miles of Walkable Trail Access to expressed Wichita and SG County trail needs City Classes N Pop in .5 mile service area Urban Pop 2000 % in Service Area current miles of urban walkable trails additonal trail mileage needed to achieve 90% target within .5 miles 90% service level POP target Cost for additional trail miles needed @ $ 428,000 per mile Source all Wichita SG county 537 650773 127443 2166974 344284 452869 30.0% 37.0% 369 58 140 738 83 1950277 309855 407582 $315,864,000 $35,524,000 $43,250,000
Proximity Proximity PROs study Trail construction costs are estimated to range from $12 (natural)-$150(concrete) per linear ft for a 10' wide shared use trail Price estimate assumes an average of $81 on the assumption that trail surfaces and widths will vary widely
Source: city of Rolesville, NC planning doc
cost per mile @ $ 81 per linear ft = $ 428,000 estimate does not include any estimate for population growth in urban areas however, only 1/5 of Kansas cities have increasing populations SG county population is 24% higher than the city of Wichita (452869/344284), the trail cost estimate is only 18% higher (43,250,000/35524000) than city needs Wichita levels of service is 20% higher than the state average 37%/30% of residents living within .5 mile of walkable trail access