Steve Burr and Dale Blahna Michael Butkus and Judy Kurtzman

Stakeholder Attitudes in Assessing Outdoor

Recreational and Open Space Needs in Utah:

A Rural--Urban Dichotomy

Steve Burr and Dale BlahnaMichael Butkus and Judy Kurtzman

Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism

Utah State University

2

Rapid GrowthCities and Communities Experiencing Growth

Rates Exceeding the National Average

A Number of Problems:• lack of infrastructure• increased cost of living• changes in land values• lack of planning to manage

growth• resulting environmental and

social impacts• perceived decline in quality

of life

3

Certainly True in the State of Utah

• High rate of in-migration• Highest birthrate in

the nation• Concentrated growth--sixth

most urban state• High rate of land and

resource use• Poor zoning regulations

encouraging sprawl

4

More Than Four-Fifths of Utah’s Population Now Lives in a Metropolis

--the Greater Wasatch--a Ten County “Blob” of Urbanization

By 2020...•67% increase in GW--1.6M to 2.7M people

•Adding 43,000 people every year

•84% increase in developed land (590 square miles)

By 2050...•Five million people in Utah

The Greater Wasatch

5

Utah’s Great Outdoors Open Space Project

Purpose: Identify open space needs, priorities, and initiatives for each of the seven Planning Districts in Utah.

Focus on issues related to: •outdoor recreation•amenity values•ecological services

6

Utah’s 7 Planning Districts and 29 Counties

Bear River Wasatch Front Mountainland Uintah Basin Central Southeastern Southwestern

7


Seek input from key stakeholders:•land management and planning

professionals;•state and local officials;•community leaders and residents.

Identify action strategies for addressing open space needs.

8


Three Phase Process

Phase 1:

Phase 2:

Phase 3:

Utah’s Great Outdoors Conference

Statewide Key Informant Mail Survey

Public Meetings--Presentations of Findings and Opportunities for Stakeholder Input

9



176 participants in 19 different groups responded to these two questions:

• What are the most pressing outdoor recreation and open space needs in your region of the state for the next 20 years?

• What are the most pressing outdoor recreation and open space problems or needs for specific towns and communities in your region?

10



Results: Question #1--414 items identified:

“Preserve the wetlands and wildlife areas surrounding the Great Salt Lake.”

Question #2--242 items identified:

“Small communities have insufficient funds for purchase of critical lands or development of recreation facilities.”

11


Statewide Key Informant Survey

To further validate and prioritize the importance of outdoor recreation and open space needs for each Planning District that were identified at the Conference (7-point Likert Scale).

To obtain stakeholder attitudes toward 25 open space protection tools (7-point Likert Scale).

12


Statewide Key Informant Survey

287 Surveys Mailed 182 Returned 63% Response Rate

Utah’s Great Outdoors

A survey conducted by Utah State

University’s Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism and

the Utah Division of Parks and Recreation

Spring 1999

13


Statewide Key Informant Survey Results--Open Space Needs

Statewide:• Cooperation/partnerships in planning for and

provision of open space;• Trails/corridors for recreation and access;• Education for children and adults directed at

proper use, minimizing impacts, and importance of open space;

• Developing access and managing open space.

14



Northern Utah:• Water quality and quantity, wetlands, and

wildlife habitat;• Protecting access to mountain canyons and

public lands;• Open space protection in urban, suburban, and

developing areas;• Land acquisition (identification

and funding).

15



Rural Utah:• Long-term, reliable funding for development

and maintenance;• Long-range planning (cooperation

and assistance);• Specific projects with economic benefits;• Community quality of life and

economic benefits;• Historic/heritage sites.

16


Public Meetings

Present prioritized listing of outdoor recreation and open space needs for each Planning District.

Seek out stakeholder comments on these findings.

Ask participants to identify existing and potential projects addressing outdoor recreation and open space needs.

17


Public Meetings

Presentations:• To approximately 350 individuals at 19

different meetings throughout the state;

• Association of Governments (AOG) meetings in each Planning District;

• Travel Region meetings;

• City/County Councils meetings;

• Special Groups (e.g. Public Lands Forum)

18


Results of Public Meetings

Over 300 specific outdoor recreation and open space projects identified for the seven Planning Districts in Utah.

A broader picture of the social and political context in which open space planning must occur in Utah.

19


Major Themes Evident

Two broad types of open space needs:

• Specific Purpose Projects• individual trails • water projects• visitor centers • heritage sites• parks

• General Concerns • funding • education • partnerships • planning needs

20



There are two different orientations toward open space values.

• Some major differences exist between stakeholders in urban/suburban and rural planning districts regarding the purpose and value of open space.

21



Urban/Suburban stakeholders emphasize protection of open space for non-use or intrinsic values, along with recreational and access needs. • For community aesthetics and amenities• For controlling growth and development• For providing ecological services -

wildlife habitat -wetlands protection -water quality

22



Stakeholders in rural areas are more concerned with the use value or instrumental value of open space.• To help meet local economic needs through

outdoor recreation and tourism development • To retain public access for recreation• To retain traditions of multiple use of

natural resources on public lands

23



Key challenge to successful, long-term statewide planning and funding efforts...

…is providing opportunities to enhance both the use and environmental protection roles of open space simultaneously.

24


Recommendations

Linking these two orientations is possible.

Will require an explicit and balanced effort to bring these together.

Especially important to encourage support and collaboration with rural areas of the state.

25



Open space linear corridors and water-related resources are critical.

•Linear corridors mentioned most often: -trails and paths -bikeways -OHV routes•Corridors implied by projects mentioned for: -parkways -riparian corridors

-riverways -wildlife corridors -canyon protection & access -corridors linking communities & towns

26



• Water-related projects are considered important throughout the state.

• In rural areas, focus is on providing or improving reservoir and river recreation.

• In urban/suburban areas, water quality, wetlands protection, and wildlife habitat are of equal or greater importance.

27


Recommendations

To enhance long-term benefits from statewide coordination and funding will require Specific Purpose Projects to be designed to simultaneously meet recreational development and use goals along with natural resource protection goals.

28



Funding, funding, funding…

• Stakeholders throughout the Planning Districts view funding as a key role for state agencies.

• Not simply providing funds, but also providing technical advice and coordination for identifying and acquiring funds.

29


Recommendations

Provide a larger portion of funds to rural Planning Districts.• Distributing funds on per capita basis is

problematic.• Many urban/suburban residents travel to

rural areas of the state for recreation.• Tourists visit many of the rural areas.• Puts a higher level of pressure on rural

resources and infrastructure.

30


Major Themes & Recommendations

Long-term and consistent sources of funding important for rural areas.

Long-term resource protection and amenity/ecological service values are statewide concerns.

Funding should be used to encourage planning districts to help protect these broader social values.

31



Local Control--State Coordination

In general, stakeholders see great value in statewide coordination of open space planning and funding efforts, but at the same time want to retain local control.

32


Recommendations

Focus on projects that meet local needs.

• Large pool of existing and potential open space projects in all planning regions.

• Priorities can be identified by local stakeholders.

• Local needs should be a starting point for statewide planning and funding priorities.

33


Recommendations

But also focus on projects that meet broader state needs. • Funding criteria should recognize both use

and non-use values of open space.

• Funding should help meet local needs as well as broader state level needs.

• Open space planning and funding must be a joint effort between local and state agencies and stakeholders.

34



Planning and funding criteria for a project might include evidence that it:

• Meets both local and state level needs;

• Has local community support;

• Is part of larger scale planning efforts;

35



Planning and funding criteria for a project might include evidence that it:

• Meets objectives related to amenity and ecological service values... even if the project focuses on use;

• Is part of a collaboration or partnership;

• Has an educational component.

36

Stakeholder Attitudes in Assessing Outdoor Recreational and Open Space Needs

in Utah:

A Rural--Urban Dichotomy

Steve Burr & Dale BlahnaMichael Butkus & Judy Kurtzman

Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism

Utah State University

5220 Old Main HillLogan, Utah 84322-5220

(435) [email protected]

Documents

Steve Burr and Dale Blahna Michael Butkus and Judy Kurtzman