8 Local Government Parks Services
Cooperation Ball Park, Cheboygan County. (Photo courtesy of Theodore Haskell Theodore Haskell.) Gaylan Rasmussen
59 Local parks give people easy access to open space, recreation facilities and programs throughout their daily lives as well as on vacations and special trips. As Michigan communities grew, departments were structured within local government to deal with two sets of values: land values (dealing with parks) and human values (dealing with recreation). It is the human use of the land for leisure and recreation that gives it value to the community. This justifies the use of public funds to enhance the quality of life in the community. Many people in Michigan consider their parks as “green islands.” The green grass and shade trees provide times and
59 places to “re-create” balance in their lives. In providing for this public use park and recreation agencies plan, develop, and operate their programs and services within the larger environment of the community. Well maintained shade trees, lawns and flowerbeds in the parks tell residents and visitors alike that the community “plans to be here” for a long time. To insure delivery of these services, park and recreation departments, board and commission members, administrators and their staffs, should constantly plan, operate, and above all, evaluate results. Local parks are established, operated, and maintained by the authority of local governmental units including: City parks, Township parks, County parks, and Metropolitan parks (multi-county). In addition the Michigan Department of Transportation roadside parks and rest areas, operated by the state primarily for travelers and tourists, serve as sites for local picnics and related uses. Local parks provide facilities for both active and passive recreation activities. Sometimes both local government agencies and private sector concessionaires provide a variety of recreational services, sports areas, ball fields, beaches and swimming pools in the local parks. Though much has been done since the cow pasture baseball of the last century, the environment, both physical and social, keeps changing in Michigan. Like the chameleon whose skin changes from browns to greens as it moves through the leaves, local parks and recreation departments also should keep changing. The decisions of the past are out of reach behind us; the future will be shaped by the decisions that we make in the present.
History of Local Parks and Recreation in Michigan: The practical development of local parks and recreation services in Michigan began in 1913 with the first of several “enabling acts.” These state acts gave legal authority to spend public money to provide services and facilities that individuals found difficult or impossible to provide for themselves.
How Early Departments Were Created
Before World War I, most Michigan local parks were resource-based. Community open spaces provided walks, benches, lawns and flower beds, shade and ornamental trees. River banks and walkways provided for promenades and fishing. As people had more time for leisure, local park boards and commissions developed parkways for carriages, bicycles and automobiles, and open spaces for picnics. By mid-century interest in competitive sports resulted in greater emphasis on organized recreation programs. Local parks responded with facilities for baseball, softball and slow-pitch, tennis, golf, and more recently for shuffleboard and basketball. Many of the older cities found that as “urban sprawl” swept out from the old urban core the countryside was no longer a short walk from the downtown. Plans were made for “green space” inside the cities. Larger parks on the developing edges and school/parks and “miniparks” to provide access to open spaces anywhere in town were created with the help of Michigan’s “$100 million bond issue” and federal “open space grants.” The situation was different in the suburban areas. Building lots in the post World War II subdivisions were larger and lawns were greener. More emphasis was on the joint school-park sites that might share three acres plus three acres for a school-park of six acres, or even more. Cooperative maintenance agreements were more cost effective. Jobs were opening for the
59 young professionals that began to graduate from the new park and recreation curricula in Michigan schools. No one was really worried about “open space” in the rural areas. A great view began from the back porch. The county park and recreation boards, operating under the new enabling acts, have been responding to community requests for organized sports and the development of sports fields.
Current Status In the early 1980s the Municipal and County Park and Recreation Study (MACPARS) tried to define and describe the role of the typical park and recreation department. The study included responses from 1,242 local full time park and recreation departments in 49 states. According to MACPARS the typical department spent about $17 in 1985 operating funds/citizen served. Sources of funding were property taxes (65%), other taxes (10%), user fees (19%) and other sources (6%). Permanent staff served 2,750 citizens per staff member. The ratio of permanent-to-seasonal staff was about 1 to 5. In 1985 at the national level, the typical local park department managed about 8 sports fields, 8 tennis courts, and 4 basketball courts, 1 pool, 1 golf course, 5 playgrounds and 1 recreation center. Natural resource-oriented features included 4 camping sites, 1 organized camp, 80 acres of natural areas, 18 acres of lakes, and 6 miles of various kinds of trails. Athletic programs represent more than 1/3 of all programming in small communities. In larger communities, however, programs for the arts and social activities were gaining. Programs for the various special populations were offered by about of the departments nationwide. Departments emphasized service to the mental health related and mentally retarded populations. Programs for the gifted and multi-handicapped were almost non-existent. Programs for seniors were offered in 2/3 of the departments. Michigan falls within the Midwest Census Region and the NRPA Great Lakes Region. In the Great Lakes region, averages of outdoor facilities and sites included 9 playgrounds, 15 sports fields, 11 tennis courts, 8 basketball courts, 2 swimming pools, and 2 golf courses; averages of indoor sites: 2 recreation centers, 3 gyms, and 3 racket/handball courts. The top 50 cities in Michigan have park and recreation departments. The Michigan Recreation and Park Association lists 180 agency memberships, 792 individual professionals, and 689 Board and/or Commissioners (MRPA, 1995). On a national ranking of 15 issues or concerns for local parks, the top three were maintenance of (1) sites and (2) facilities and (3) adding new, mostly outdoor, ones. Funding, information, and help were also significant. Many comments emphasized the need for outside assistance to provide a basis for meeting future needs (MACPARS, 1988). Role of Park and Recreation Services Park and recreation services are amenities which enhance the quality of life within a particular community. Opportunities are provided to residents for healthful physical, social, and emotional activities. This is done through the development of parks, facilities, and recreation activity programs.
60 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities Services to community residents should be balanced with economic reality. Some services to the public are deemed to be of such high social value that economic barriers should not stand in the way of participation or use. Other services which are viewed as beneficial and are of interest to a smaller number of people require a user fee to defray or cover all or part of program expenses. At one end of the “recreation yardstick” is the public role of providing for recreation facilities and programs. These are paid from the public funds and are available at no charge to all residents and visitors. The middle position is held by the role of revenue producing special services. The client groups here are also mostly residents, but often include regional visitors. Their need is for special facilities that they wish to enjoy and for which they are willing to pay (Example: golf courses). Since they may not be needed by all residents, these facilities should not be subsidized entirely by general tax funds, although taxpayers may receive certain indirect benefits. At the far end of the yardstick is the role of recreation as an income-producing industry. This clientele group is made up mostly of people from outside the area, drawing from a statewide or even a multi- state market. Recreation facilities of this sort, primarily because of their income producing goal, are most often found in the private sector. Private capital is invested, jobs are created, and these activities usually generate substantial income throughout the local community. Governments may own the land and lease the operation to a concessionaire. They may operate some sites directly if no private interest is willing or able to provide these services. The decision-makers and policy-makers should recognize this range of recreation function and have a firm understanding of the proper “mix” for their area. This will serve them well as they approach decisions dealing with acquisitions, developments and operating both areas and facilities. The decision-makers should now look toward the year 2000 A.D. They need to think through the implications of this “recreation yardstick” as it concerns the park and recreation policies. Range of services provided should be based on the needs of the communities in the areas to be served. Legislation is needed to establish the necessary authority to meet the challenging changes growing populations, changing community patterns and critical environmental standards. Policies provide guidelines for consistent decisions on direction and priorities. Policy-makers operate at all levels of government from federal and state legislators and administrators to local councils, commissioners and park and recreation department heads. Once the direction and priorities are set it is the function of the administrators and executives, at the various levels, to “make it happen.” This is done by setting up standards, practices and procedures for each of the local park operations. These operations may include a range of facilities from swimming pools, picnic areas, archery ranges, and systems for sanitation, solid waste management, risk management, and park security for both visitors and employees. Accreditation provides a system by which separate organizations, institutions and agencies can be examined by a group of peers. The policies and practices of the organization can be measured against a set of standards established by knowledgeable people. Standards for desirable operational practices by park and recreation systems have been established through an accreditation program (see chapter 9). Park and Recreation officials also should undertake a review of existing local and county ordinances and regulations and develop an up-to-date body of park rules.
Local Government Parks Services 61 Categories of Park and Recreation Areas While “traditional” categorization of local parks will vary, the National Recreation and Parks Association has developed a common terminology that is used by many communities. These terms for local/close to home space include: Mini Parks, Neighborhood parks/playground, Playflelds, Community local parks, Special feature parks, Riverbanks and flood plains. Definitions for service areas, desirable size, and typical features are given in Recreation, Park, and Open Space Standards and Guidelines published by the NRPA (1983). The authority to acquire and develop land for park purposes usually originates in state enabling acts. In the Michigan Constitution of 1963, Article VII: Local Government, Sections: 1, 2, delegate authority to counties; Sec. 14, 17, to townships; Sec. 21, 22, to cities and villages; Sec. 23 specifies parks and facilities for cities; Sec. 34 same development for counties and townships (Twardzik and Fitch, 1990). This authority is delegated to local governments and allows, but does not require, them to implement it through local charters and ordinances. Lands may be acquired for park purposes through purchase, acceptance of gifts and bequests, and on occasion, through right of eminent domain (condemnation). Because land costs rise rapidly as areas are developed, planned acquisition is crucial. Acquisition of lands shall be for both current and projected needs of the community. Organization of Agencies No standardized “master cookie cutter” organization will guarantee success of a park and recreation agency. During recent history, however, certain patterns of organization have developed. In many of the older city and county departments the need was for access to safe, attractive public land: parks with mowed lawns, flowers, no dead trees, and lighting for nighttime.
City Parks
Many Michigan cities followed the lead of the great landscaped parks of the major cities of the East Coast such as Central Park in New York, Druid Hill in Baltimore, Rock Creek Park in Washington, and established authority in park departments. In some older parts of Michigan the first public departments were established as “parks departments” and in the newer developed ones as “recreation departments.” Recognizing the administrative efficiencies and economies of combined operations almost all Michigan communities now provide “park and recreation” services. Another pattern that has worked well in many of the less populated parts of the state is that of the school district combined with a village or township in providing park and recreation services.
County Parks
In Michigan counties the first legislation gave authority to county commissioners to put the park operations in the capable hands of the County Road Commissions (P.A. 1913 No. 90 as amended: Parks, Zoological Gardens and Airports). These commissions employed professional civil engineers and had workers and equipment for basic land management. Some of the larger commissions, Wayne County and Kent County for two examples, soon developed park managers and departments. Changing demands for services and need for a broader based
62 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities representation from various areas (rural, suburban, metro and urban) resulted in alternate forms of enabling acts (ex. P.A. 1917 No. 156 Recreation and Playgrounds, and P.A. 1965 No. 261 County Parks) becoming available to the county governments (Twardzik and Fitch, 1990).
Huron-Clinton Metroparks
Other large parks were needed near the heavy population centers in southeast counties, but there was a problem. Buying land for large parks (1000 acres+) is expensive. It becomes even more expensive when large, high-density residential developments increase land values. One answer is to buy land farther out in the country where farmland is cheaper. By creating a multi-county “authority” you can form a tax base that includes both the people that need large parks and affordable land to develop the parks. Michigan had its answer. The Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority was authorized by the Michigan legislature in Act 147 of Public Acts of 1939. The original concept was to create a “driving for pleasure” parkway. The parkway would run along the Clinton and Huron rivers through a chain of parks around the rim of the metropolitan region. As the metropolitan area grew the Huron Clinton Metropolitan Authority provided a coordinated ring of parklands on the rim of the five county metropolitan area. These parklands link and supplement both the state parks and local park systems of the growing suburbs of Detroit. The parks were developed, operated and maintained by a 1/4 mil tax on the five counties of Wayne, Oakland, Livingston, Washtenaw and Macomb. The Metroparks system in 1995 includes 13 parks of 24,000 acres and serves between~8.5 and 9.5 million people each year. People come to Kensington, Metro Beach, and the other eleven parks along the two rivers during all four seasons. They go swimming, picnicking, special camping. They attend large group events, play golf, fish from boats, from banks and even through the ice. In recent years the parkway policy changed and emphasis was placed on more effective development of parklands. Planning conferences between the State Parks and the Metroparks have determined which of the recreational resources, water-related, hunting, hiking, fishing, or camping, might best be developed by each agency to meet the needs of the people of the region. Half the people of Michigan live here. The wide range of recreational development by cities, counties, Metroparks and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources reflects this “cooperative and complementary approach.” Operations and Maintenance Public parks at all levels of government need maintenance of the grounds and facilities. A maintenance and operations plan (with both written and graphic references) will establish the standards for management of the park and recreation areas. Parks and portions of large parks should be carefully classified according to the intended use of the area. Such classifications will range from heavily used and highly developed areas to the large meadows and wooded vistas that act as buffer zones and provide some sense of solitude. Each of these classifications can be assigned an appropriate set of maintenance standards including both recommended frequency (how often?) and acceptable quality (what is “well done”?). Competent personnel should be assigned to clearly defined duties for routine maintenance, repairs and minor improvements, general cleanliness and overall attractiveness.
Local Government Parks Services 63 Maintenance protects the public and the public investment in land, water, and facilities. A National Recreation and Park Association budget survey found 12% spent on administration, 33% spent on programming and 55% spent on facility maintenance. A Pennsylvania study estimated 90—95% of the cost of constructing and operating a facility was spent on maintenance. Another study showed 75% spent on maintenance over an estimated 40 year life of the facility (Landscapes, March 1992). Park and Recreation Cooperation Recreation services are designed to address the needs, wants, and desires of the community’s residents. A cooperative planning process should be used to determine community needs, develop recreation programs, and establish necessary cooperative operating policies with the park management and maintenance units to ensure safety and enjoyment. Evaluation practices must be established to maintain the responsiveness of these services to public demand. Cooperative programs are planned to manipulate environmental variables to enable participants to obtain predetermined benefits.
How Will Park and Recreation Services Be Paid For? Written fiscal policies should be developed setting guidelines for management and control of revenues, expenditures, and investment of funds. Legal authority should be clearly established. Policy of the agency should comply with the higher authority of the parent organization and be based on appropriate enabling legislation. Public park and recreation revenues in Michigan, like in most other states, are not all from taxes. Most communities have worked out a combination that provides the services that the people of the community are willing and able to support by one means or another. No recreation services are “free.” Financial policies may include annual capital improvements (pay-as-you-go) or bond (general obligation or revenue) issues (pay-as-you use). If a “privatization policy” for providing facilities and services is established, it should include assurances that low income portions of the population will not be denied access.
Fiscal Management
In recent years the recession has forced most Michigan communities to adopt austere budgets. This has had a real effect on the operation and maintenance of departments of parks and recreation. This problem is nationwide, and many adaptive strategies have been developed. The local park systems should make a conscientious effort to diversify their financial strategies. No one method will suffice, and the park system has to determine what its mix will be. Community foundations and the industrial community also should be invited to participate.
64 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities With reduced federal and state aid to counties and local units of government, park and recreation agencies will have to raise larger portions of their budget through various forms of user-pay revenues. These revenues may include entrance fees, concession operation, fees and charges for use of facilities and making of reservations. The revenue practices should not be developed in a haphazard manner. Inconsistency in financial arrangements may cause a loss in credibility to the agency in the mind of the park users and visitors. Park and recreation officials should investigate and establish revenue policies that will serve as guidelines for concessionaire contracts, setting of fees and charges, and developing other revenues such as user fees, and combinations of subsidized fees (Haskell and Twardzik, Huron Co., 1991). Career Opportunities Many students are able to find summer jobs in the local park and recreation field that supplement their field work and internship experiences. Summer jobs range from tree trimmers and golf course attendants to recreation leaders, camp counselors and umpires. Supervisory experience in repeat years will give real-world experiences to enrich the students’ resumes. Graduates seem to enter full time employment by either of two “career ladders.” The most traditional has been to join a large agency at the bottom of the ladder as a specialized program leader, lifeguard, tree trimmer, or park maintenance worker. By demonstrating ability to work with others and produce results they are able to move up through supervisory and administrative levels and accept more and more responsibility. The other ladder begins in a small agency where the new position involves a wide range of technical and administrative duties. In this case demonstrated ability leads to new positions in larger and larger agencies or departments. The choice between being a part of a large experienced group or being an “on-your-own” de- cision maker may depend on the mix of personal motivators (achievement, power, or affiliation). Local parks systems offer a wide choice of many managerial job opportunities. Such job opportunities may include city, county, township, and special districts including school districts. Resource based examples include: Park Superintendent, Park and Recreation Planner, Public Information Officer, Museum Director, Park Ranger, Park Law Enforcement Officer. (See next chapter for “people-oriented” recreation positions.) Entry-level education for various positions will vary from one community to another, but education for the new century will include a combination of technical skills and people skills. Being educated should mean the ability to keep on learning as fast as the environment and our human culture systems change.
Future Potential Local park and recreation agencies operate in a constantly changing environment. Since the gathering of data, the weighing of alternatives, establishment of strategies, and preparation of planning phases require large amounts of time to work through the necessary community
Local Government Parks Services 65 involvement and political implementation process, planning should be ongoing (Haskell and Twardzik, Gladwin Co., 1991). Basically, such planning should be related to several factors significant to the individual community.
Related to urban/suburban/rural demographics, particularly the school age/elderly demographics: While the population of K-12 school age tends to remain constant, study of the demographic trends indicates a growing percentage of senior citizens. The mixture of recreational facilities in our parks, playfields, and community centers will change to reflect the need for specialized facilities as well as the need for basic circulation roads and walks, rest rooms and trash removal. Related to travel time: local park lands should be accessible to the park users without large amounts of time being lost to travel compared to the time spent on recreational activities. Related to free time: in our society leisure time is viewed as the opposite side of the work time coin. Facilities should be heated, cooled, lighted to allow their use when people have free time. Many people within local communities work on schedules that are “non-traditional” in that they do not conform to the eight a.m. through five p.m., Monday through Friday work-day pattern. Yet, they are entitled to opportunities to use the public recreation system. Related to finances: Grants and government cost sharing. Where feasible and appropriate, matching funding by state and federal governments, voluntary agencies, private groups and
individuals (“Friends of. . .“) may be used. Local departments are urged to take advantage of state and federal cost-sharing programs. However, not all communities support the use of federal funds as a part of the philosophy of local financing. Many communities are developing creative fiscal management cost-sharing and cooperative agreements. Related to better serving the community: Establish relationships with people of the community. It would be a mistake to consider that all the residents of local park systems were part of one homogeneous group. In reality, any community is made up of many sub-groups, not only political and seasonal, but also geographical (rural/suburban/urban) and cultural. When we think of the implications of implementing park and recreation programs through the budget process. Departments should try to develop community support in as many of these “market segments” as possible. Related to use of technology: Computers and related electronic tools and tool systems will have an increasing impact on the way services are provided.
1. Communications: E-mail, Internet, SCOLE and other On-line services, electronic staff- meetings and electronic “water-cooler huddles.” 2. Planning and land-use management for combined recreation experiences. 3. Data Storage Management of Information Services (MIS). New Management systems including Critical Path Management (CPM), PERT Charts (Program Evaluation and Review Technique)
66 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities Professional Organizations See chapter 9 for Michigan Recreation and Park Association (MRPA) and The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA).
The Michigan Forestry and Park Association (MF&PA)
In 1926 the Michigan Forestry and Park Association was organized at MSU. The annual professional education programs were held on the campus to share new information between the campus faculty, the public sector foresters, and the commercial arborists and nursery operators. This organization encouraged cooperation between the MSC forestry graduates involved with cities, highway department, road commissions, and power companies.
References Haskell, Theodore J., and Louis F. Twardzik (1991). Gladwin County Park and Recreation Review and Assessment. East Lansing, MI: Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources.
Haskell, Theodore J., and Louis F. Twardzik (1991). Huron County Park and Recreation Review and Assessment. East Lansing, MI: Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources.
Howard, Dennis R., and John L. Crompton (1980). Financing, Managing, and Marketing Park and Recreation Services. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown Co.
Landscapes (1992). Hartford Parks Master Plan. March.
Lansing Land Policy (1976).
McDonald, B. L., and H. K. Cordell (1988). MACPARS: Local Opportunities for Americans: Final Report of the Municipal and County Park and Recreation Study, Alexandria, VA: National Recreation and Park Association. 108 pp.
NRPA (1983). Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines.
NRPA, AAPRA, NCALP (1993). A Guide to Standards with Commentary for Local Public Park and Recreation Agency Accreditation, Draft 7.
Twardzik, Louis F., and Eric J. Fitch (1990). Summary of Laws Relating to Local Parks, Recreation and Tourism. Extension Bulletin NRM 33. East Lansing, MI: Cooperative Extension Service, Michigan State University.
Local Government Parks Services 67 9Local Government Recreation/Program Services Betty van der Smissen
V
Playground group, lngham County. (Photo courtesy of Theodore Haskell.) A Rich History in Michigan Local government in Michigan has a long and rich history of providing parks and recreation programs for its citizens. At the turn of the 19th century, the foundation of the Detroit Park system was laid. In 1806, the governor and judges of Michigan laid out Detroit with 69
68 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities several public spaces and parks, such as Grand Circus, Harmonie, and Times Square. However, it was nearly 50 years later (1854) when the first improvements were made, almost $2,000 for a fence and sidewalks around Grand Circus Park and planting of trees. The Detroit Park Commission was established in 1871. Belle Isle was created in 1879. By 1900, a dozen parks had been set aside for the citizens of Detroit. Detroit also was an early leader in the national playground movement. In 1899, a committee was denied permission to establish a playground on the old reservoir site, but a short time later, the committee was granted permission to use the basement and first floor corridor of the Russell School. With funds solicited from private citizens and with donated sports equipment, the committee established the first playground in Detroit. The first playfield was established in 1901. And, in 1903, the first appropriation ($1,200) for playground equipment was included in the Board of Education budget. Playgrounds, thereafter, became a regular part of the School Board’s program. The Playground Association of America in 1913 conducted a survey and found urgent need for a recreation system because 90% of the children were playing in the streets and only 16 school grounds were equipped for summer recreation. A Recreation Commission for Detroit was created by Charter Amendment in 1914 and a superintendent of recreation was appointed. Five years later a $10,000,000 public improvement bond was approved for acquiring and improving grounds for public parks and recreation. In other parts of the state parks and playgrounds were also being established. Flint (1875) and Lansing (1878) preceded Detroit (1879) in creating parks, and Grand Rapids followed at the turn of the century (1903 —04).
Role of Recreational Program Services The role of recreation/program services by local government in the community is that of providing a foundation on which other leisure pursuits can build. It is a legally authorized (see preceding chapter) and generally considered an essential function of government at the local level. Whereas the provision of parks, an area for recreation, described in the preceding chapter, is also an important function of local government, it is the direct leadership and facilitation of programs that impact on the lives of individuals through personal relationships and role models. If you enjoy working with people and conducting recreation programs, whether it is organizing and managing a softball league for seniors or a youth soccer program, teaching aerobics or supervising a weight lifting program, instructing in crafts or ballet, facilitating the community “little theatre” or a special event like a festival, or working with youngsters on the playground or assisting senior citizens to go on a trip— then perhaps a career in the local public parks and recreation department is for you. No, you will not be doing ALL of these programs, but the department may provide this scope of programs . . . and more. There are three components related to public recreation/program services—the program fields, the site of program services, and the structure of programs.
Program Fields The scope of program often is evaluated in terms of the various program fields; that is, is there something of each type of program field, for the various fields appeal to individuals of
68 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities different interests and needs. There are some commonly considered fields, which include sports and athletics, outdoor recreation and nature activities, the cultural arts including music, the arts, and dramatics, social recreation, low organized games and recreational sports, aquatics, special events, etc. Within each field, the specific activities are very diverse and expansive. There is no “given~~ as to what each community must have. The offerings will depend upon each community—the other recreation opportunities in the community, the particular needs and interests of the people, the funding available to provide leadership, facilities and areas, and other human and physical resources. Professional career opportunities in the various program fields depend on the size of the community and extent of the program. In some cities an athletic or sports director will be employed; almost always, if there is a pool, an aquatics director will manage the pool and aquatic program; and an interpreter will be employed if there is a nature center or other nature-oriented programs (see chapter 13). Often there may be part-time specialists handling activities, especially instructional offerings, such as crafts, aerobics, tennis, ballet, etc. There may be a coordinator of special events, who would service such events as senior citizen trips and festivals, or a director of “little theatre.” In some situations there will be a program coordinator for the city or for a region of the city or for a recreation center—in this situation, the individual will oversee the program services and usually obtain part-time staff or volunteer specialists to conduct the actual activities. If the coordinator does have a program specialty, such a person may continue with direct leadership in that specialty. Today the public park and recreation department, particularly in urban environments, is concerned not only with offering activities in specific program fields, but also with providing various basic life skills and understandings to both youth and adults. Thus, there may be classes provided by the department related to drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, adult literacy, child care, etc. (see later section on recreation centers).
Site of Program Services There are basically three types of sites where recreation program services are conducted— areas, facilities, and “in the community.”
Areas
The preceding chapter describes the common categories of areas: miniparks, neighborhood parks/playgrounds, playfields, community local parks, special feature parks, and riverbanks and flood plains. Then, there are the county parks and the metropolitan authority parks. Not all cities, especially the smaller ones, will have all categories of local parks. However, nearly all cities of whatever size do have playgrounds for the children, playfields for sports, and a park with grass/trees for picnics and other local gatherings. Particularly in the smaller cities, both playgrounds and playfields may be in combination with the schools. In the larger cities there should be a playground in each neighborhood.
Playgrounds. Playgrounds usually have playground apparatus (swings, slides, climbing structures, etc.) and an open grassy play area. There may be trees and tables/benches, which can be used not only for quiet play, such as crafts, for the children, but also for adults tending young children, and especially older citizens. Often there will be recreational sports/games
70 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities areas, such as horseshoes or a hard surface with basketball goals. Usually in summer there will be supervised play for children sponsored by either the city parks and recreation department or, particularly in smaller cities, by the school system. Often there are special program considerations for persons with disabilities (see chapter 15). These summer job opportunities are excellent for older teenagers and college students to gain experience in recreation. Unfortunately, budget shortcomings sometimes curtail the summer offerings.
Playfields. Playfields are essentially the athletic fields and sports complex—softball and baseball diamonds and soccer fields at a minimum. There also may be tennis courts, basketball courts, one-wall or three-wall handball courts, and a track. There will be bleachers for spectators, rest rooms, and usually a concessions area. Sometimes a children’s play area and a picnic area may be available. Organized leagues sign up for use of the fields and diamonds. The leagues may be independent community-sponsored, such as Little League, sponsored by churches or other community group, or conducted by the public recreation and parks department. The youth and adult teams usually pay a fee to participate to cover the expenses of maintenance of the fields, equipment, and officials. Usually there is an athletic coordinator and paid officials. If the complex is more than diamonds, then there may be tennis instructors or other athletic personnel employed.
Community parks. The local community parks, other than for the playgrounds and play-fields just described, usually will not have a great deal of recreation programming. Individuals, families, clubs and other groups will use the area and its facilities, which often includes picnic areas with tables/benches and grills, pavilions, perhaps an exercise course, etc. If there are any special facilities, such as a nature center (see chapter 13) or swimming pool, these, of course, will have their own staffing. Depending on the size of the park, there may be trails and other special features. One programmed activity, however, is day camping. Day camps may be conducted by the local park and recreation department, by the Girl Scouts, by a church group, YMCA, or other organization. There will be staff employed to direct the program, but usually there is considerable opportunity for volunteers.
County parks. Some of the finest program services are in the county park systems in Michigan, such as Genessee County Park system, which originated in 1968. It serves not only the citizens of the county, but much of southeastern Michigan due to some unique facilities. The system has seven parks with over 10,000 acres and an annual operations fund of $5.8 million. This fund comes approximately one-half from fees and concessions and the rest from property taxes. Two of the unique special features are Crossroads Village and Huckleberry Railroad. The Bicentennial in 1976 spurred the development of this village. Historic buildings about to be demolished to make way for a new expressway were brought together to form a village of southern Michigan rural life. One of the features of the Village is the Huckleberry Railroad, an 8-mile narrow gauge railway that was put on an abandoned railroad right of way. The 25-minute train ride takes thousands of visitors through a picturesque countryside. The park maintains the train and is constantly renovating old railway equipment. For example, a current locomotive in use was originally used on the Alaska railway system of the 1920s. Another special feature of the Genessee County Parks system is the Mounds. This is the only public off-road vehicle area in southeastern Lower Michigan. This former gravel pit is being upgraded into a high quality ORV area, accessible to many riders in a basically impervious environment.
Metropolitan authority. The Huron Clinton Metropolitan Authority was created in 1939 by statute and is Michigan’s only regional park system (see preceding chapter). This 13-park,
Local Government Recreation/Program Services 71 24,000 acre system also provides recreation program services. It has available a wide variety of day use activities, such as the water-related facilities located on the Huron and Clinton Rivers, as well as Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie. Interpretive programming is provided at 8 of the 13 parks (see chapter 13). The system also has a staff of rangers, who are also certified police officers deputized by the counties in which they serve. This professional force has duties with a strong focus on resource protection and visitor education. The system is funded similarly to the Genessee County system, but in addition obtains oil and gas royalties and lease payments from mineral extraction on park lands. This oil and gas money has been used to finance major maintenance and other capital improvements.
Facilities
The foregoing discussion on areas also includes some facilities which the parks provide. In addition to these, a most important aspect of local park and recreation department program services takes place at recreation centers, sometimes referred to as neighborhood or community centers. Also, often overlooked are facilities/programs in the community under auspices of local government, but not usually administered by the recreation and park department.
Recreation centers. These centers, whether one for the smaller cities or more than 40 for the City of Detroit, can serve as a focal point of community activity. While there are some other building-centered programs, e.g., the Ys, Boys and Girls Clubs (see chapter 6), the recreation center administered by the local government serves the whole community and can also serve as a “safe haven” for youngsters, particularly in urban areas. There are essentially three types of program services—face-to-face leadership, general supervision, and facilitation. In face-to-face leadership programs, the activity is conducted by a professional person or volunteer with specialized capability for that particular activity. These may include fitness and health programs, crafts, or any of the program fields presented in the first section. The second type is the availability of the facility for “open recreation,” whether it be the gymnasium, multipurpose rooms, crafts area, etc.; but the participation, whether youth or adult, is under the general supervision of a professional staff member or volunteer. The recreation center staff can serve as a facilitator by making available the facility to community groups for conducting their own programs. In addition, the staff person can facilitate “out-of-center” activities by organizing trips, outings, or excursions, assisting in personnel training, or providing information about resources and procedures to obtain.
“ Full-service” centers. There is a trend toward “full-service” community centers, that is, rather than only recreation, other community services are also housed at the center. These would include welfare services with branch offices at the center to accommodate the citizens in their own neighborhood and community organizations which provide special social services.
Public services/programs. There is another group of public facilities, which often are overlooked as part of local public recreation opportunities. These include the libraries, art galleries, museums, zoos, etc. These services not only have programs on-site, but also often their staffs will take programs to the neighborhoods. All of these public facilities welcome trips or outings of children or adults to their facility. Sometimes the cultural arts facilities are under private enterprise, but also do have programs for both children and adults and should not be overlooked.
72 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities All programming does not have to be done either on a public area or in a public facility! One aspect already has been alluded to—trips, outings, excursions to a feature in the community. However, perhaps more important than a single event are the opportunities to program in partnership with private enterprise and the nonprofit sector. These might include working with greenhouses and nurseries, photographic and design businesses, sports businesses such as bowling and golf, the special interest groups for theatre or music, etc. Structure of Programs There are many programming structures in public recreation, as is true for other providers, too. The structure is determined by the particular needs of the constituency, the objectives of the programming, the background of the leadership, and other factors. However, since public recreation does try to serve a broad spectrum of the community, the national accreditation standards (see next section) recommends a variety of structures. Because individuals respond differently to various structural formats and have numerous developmental needs, in order to reach individuals, it is essential to provide for a wide range of types of participation. Opportunities for recreation should be provided which require varying types of involvement by the individual, such as vigorous physical activity, intellectual concentration, skill development, or watching a performance. Opportunities also should be provided which require various degrees of participant responsibility and interrelationship, such as clubs, leagues, tournaments, study groups, skills instructional classes, informal workshops, and discussions. Public recreation should be concerned not only with “mass recreation” but also with the need of people to recreate with small groups and alone. Encompassed in program opportunities should be those in which an individual may participate alone, such as walking, painting, reading; those in which only a few are needed, such as bridge, tennis, music ensembles; and those for which a nominally large group is required for satisfaction, such as folk dancing, community singing, some spectator events. Large community events, of course, are very valuable for community spirit, pride, and working together. As indicated under program fields, there are three basic types of providing services as related to the leadership. Some of the programs offer activities under general supervision, with specific supervision, and as a facilitator. Being a program professional in public recreation requires much understanding and competence related to human behavior, as well as considerable organization and administration skill.
Accreditation A program for the accreditation of local public park and recreation agencies was developed by members of the American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration in cooperation with the National Recreation and Park Association and other concerned and interested agencies in this field. Standards were established for desirable practices in ten categories:
Agency authority and role Planning
Local Government Recreation/Program Services 73 Organization and administration Human resources Fiscal policy and management Program and services management Facility and land use management Safety and security Risk management Evaluation and research
There are 152 standards in these 10 categories, of which 35 are required of all agencies seeking accreditation. The accreditation program is set forth in the document, Self-Assessment Manual for Quality Operation of Park and Recreation Agencies.
Professional Organizations Michigan Recreation and Park Association (MRPA)
The Recreation Association (RAM) was formed in 1935 (incorporated in 1958) as a sports federation of mid-Michigan cities to encourage and help with recreational sports competitions between the teams sponsored by the various Michigan cities. Today the Association, which became MRPA in 1966, still sponsors many sport and recreation events among cities. The MRPA is a statewide organization for professionals, particularly in the public park and recreation field. Commissioners and members of local park and recreation boards are also involved. MRPA provides extensive improvement opportunities for its members through publications, educational meetings, and an annual conference. It administers the Certified Leisure Professional (CLP) certification program for the state of Michigan. Its office is at 2722 E. Michigan, Suite 201, Lansing, MI 48912. A newsletter, Leisure Focus, is published monthly.
National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA)
The NRPA’s roots go back to the early 1900s as the Playground Association of America. Then, in 1965, a number of recreation and park associations merged into NRPA. Today, NRPA is the principal national organization in the field of recreation and parks. It serves special areas through its various branches and sections, such as for public parks and recreation, commercial recreation and tourism, aquatics, therapeutic recreation, leisure and aging, park resources, recreation educators, and armed forces. It provides many services not only to its membership but also to the public in general. Its monthly publication is Parks & Recreation, and its office is at 2775 5. Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22206.
Michigan Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation & Dance
(MA HPERD)
MAHPERD is a state affiliate of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD). Among the associations allied in AAHPERD is the American Association for Leisure and Recreation (AALR), which promotes school, community, and national programs of leisure services and recreation education. In addition, although a primary thrust of
74 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities AAHPERD is school-oriented programs, of particular interest to recreation programmers is the focus on active lifestyles, dance, exercise and aging, early childhood development, physical activity for those with disabilities, and health and fitness. The state association holds conferences and workshops and focuses upon state issues and concerns. MAHPERD’s office is located at 4676 Vandalia St., Commerce Township, MI 48382.
Michigan Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (MIRSA)
MIRSA was established only in 1993, and is the state affiliate of the National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA), which was founded 40 years ago. The purpose of the organization is to promote and enhance the quality of recreational sports programs in various settings throughout Michigan. It has an annual conference and addresses state issues. Recently, NIRSA established a certified recreation sports specialist (CRSS) program. MIRSA’s office is at 200 SAC, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI 48858.
Career Opportunities There are many career opportunities in public parks and recreation departments. Many of these have been described in the foregoing sections. Great satisfaction can come from the direct leadership of program activities with the participants, as one sees them respond and have enriched lives, whether children, youth, adults, or older adults. The leader is an enabler to individuals to help them reach their potential and find enjoyment. To develop and conduct quality programs with meaningful activities takes great professional competence. Another type of professional program position is that of organizing and administering programs, a program director—a broad scope program, such as may be offered by a recreation center (center director); or a specific program field, such as the sports and athletics program or the cultural arts program, or outdoor program, including day camping and outings; or a program for a specific population, such as persons with disabilities or senior citizen club.
Potential for the Future The professional opportunities in public recreation and parks have been up (in the ‘SOs and ‘60s), and then a general decline in the number of positions, as the young people taking professional positions in the ‘50—60s reached their prime professionally and few new positions became available, compounded with a decline in funding of public recreation programs as cities had fiscal problems. Today, in the mid ‘90s there is a bright future, as the colleges and universities do not seem able to graduate sufficient numbers of students interested in public recreation and parks. Positions are becoming available because there are retirements and also there appears to be greater need for leisure services related to the quality of life for both youth and seniors, hence greater funding. Public recreation has begun to accept a greater responsibility and hence role in this need for leisure services. This means, of course, that those taking careers in public recreation must have orientation to the social values of recreation in the lives of people (see under References, Urban Sanctuaries). Evidence of this acceptance of role is the Urban Recreation Plan of the
Local Government Recreation/Program Services 75 Michigan Relative Risk Task Force of the governor-appointed Natural Resources Commission. It sets forth eight goals (see References).
References Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (1994). Self-Assessment Manual for Quality Operation of Park and Recreation Agencies. Arlington, VA: National Recreation and Park Association.
McLaughlin, Milbrey W., Merita A. Irby, and Juliet Langman (1994). Urban Sanctuaries, Neighborhood Organizations in the Lives and Futures of Inner-City Youth. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers.
Urban Recreation Task Force, Joey Spano, Chair (1995). The Michigan Relative Risk Task Force—Urban Recreation Plan. Lansing, MI: Environmental Administration Division, Michigan Department of Management and Budget.
76 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities 10 State and Federal Recreation Areas in Michigan Charles Nelson Sally Childs
Munising tourist sign, Alger County. (Photo courtesy of Theodore Haskell.)
Approximately 21% of Michigan is public land, with the vast majority managed by the state and federal governments. Major state land holdings include the state forests, state game and wildlife areas, state parks and recreation areas, and water access sites. Major federal holdings include national forests, national parks, national lakeshores, and national wildlife refuges. While these lands provide recreation opportunities, most are also used for other purposes,
Local Government Recreation/Program Services 77 sometimes complementing and sometimes conflicting with recreational pursuits or priorities between users.
State of Michigan Areas State Forest Lands
History. Michigan’s state forests were acquired in three ways. Between 1900 and 1940 almost 3 million acres reverted to the state because of non-payment of property taxes. This situation developed after the timber was indiscriminately cut across Michigan from 1840 to 1895. It was assumed that the plow would follow the axe as it had in many previous frontiers, such as Ohio. Agriculture, however, was not viable in many parts of northern Michigan as infertile, sandy soils would not support intensive cropping or grazing. Hence, many loggers, who had cut and run, could not pay property taxes by selling their cutover lands. These lands reverted to the state. State officials initially tried to find buyers, but were generally unsuccessful. Those who did buy from the lumber barons or the state often found that they could not support a family farm on the poor soils and abandoned them. The land that the state had acquired in this fashion was unplanned and, for the most part, not the most productive forest land in Michigan. Another 3/4 of a million acres of state forest was purchased from willing sellers using hunting license monies and federal excise taxes on firearms and ammunition. These lands were purchased for the express purpose of providing high quality, public game, wildlife habitat and hunting land. By 1995, the Michigan Natural Resource Trust Fund, initially established in 1976 as the Kammer Land Trust fund, has purchased more than 70,000 acres of forest lands for the state forest system with the purpose of providing lands for outdoor recreation. With tax reversion only rarely occurring today, purchases from willing sellers are likely to be the only way the forest system will expand. Its expansion, therefore, is likely to be minimal and most likely to be confined to purchasing private inholdings within existing blocks of state forest.
Present. Michigan boasts the largest state forest system in the United States outside of Alaska. With 3.9 million acres (11% of Michigan), it represents the largest ownership in the state and an outstanding resource for recreation enhanced by solitude and space. The state forests are located only in the northern 2/3 of Michigan. The Copper Country, Escanaba River and Lake Superior forests are located in the Upper Peninsula and the Mackinaw, Au Sable and Pere Marquette forests are located in the Northern Lower Peninsula. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Management Division is the principal manager of the state forests. Key cooperating divisions include Wildlife, Parks and Recreation, and Law Enforcement. The forests are managed under a multiple use concept in which all outputs of the forests are viewed as of relatively equal value. Key outputs include wood, fish and wildlife, recreation, aesthetics, oil and natural gas, and protection of the pro- ductive capability of the environment. The recreation facilities the Forest Management Division operates include 148 campgrounds, 5,200 miles of snowmobile trails, 2,500 miles of ORV trails and 1,100 miles of non-motorized trails. In addition, they provide the most public land in Michigan for dispersed recreation such as hunting, nature observation, and mushroom and berry picking. The annual budget for operating the Forest Management Division is approximately $30 million. This money is expended on three key areas, timber management, fire protection and recreation. Of this budget, recreation receives approximately 10%. Much of this recreation
79 funding comes from user fees or other taxes paid by motorized trail users, boaters, and state forest campground campers. Hunters and anglers, while paying nothing directly to the Forest Management Division, support wildlife and fish biologists in the DNR, who are key cooperators in managing forest wildlife and fish. Other recreationists, such as hikers, backpackers, mountain bikers, mushroom and berry pickers, use the forest without any user fees. The State Forest Recreation Advisory Committee in 1985 created a strategic plan for forest recreation. The plan, Forest Recreation 2000, advocates five major changes in the way the forests are managed.
1. Manage state forests professionally for recreation at a level comparable to that for fire protection, timber production, and wildlife.
2. Manage state forest recreation opportunities as a system with quality, public service and environmental protection as hallmarks.
3. Effectively utilize personnel, equipment and volunteers to maximize efficiency and public service.
4. Better fund the forest recreation system by increasing funding to approximately $2/acre, from $1/acre.
5. Market the state forest recreation system so managers know and meet the needs of forest recreationists (State Forest Advisory Committee, 1994).
State Game and Wildlife Areas
The Wildlife Division of the DNR is the manager of the state’s game and wildlife areas. These 57 areas total almost 300,000 acres and are unique public properties in that they are primarily located in Southern Lower Michigan, where the vast majority of Michigan’s population resides. These areas comprise the majority of the public lands in that region of the state. Their use consists of wildlife related recreation and many other forms of recreation not related to wildlife and as habitat for a wide variety of wildlife species. Commercial commodity uses such as timber harvesting are only conducted where biologists believe such activities will benefit wildlife populations or wildlife related recreation. To manage these areas and wildlife on a statewide basis, the Wildlife Division receives an annual appropriation of approximately $17.5 million, of which 95% comes from hunters. The game and wildlife areas were primarily purchased with hunting license monies and federal Pitman-Robertson (PR) funds. The PR funds are derived from an 11% excise tax on the sale of guns and ammunition and distributed back to the states on a 3:1 matching basis. In recent years, the Michigan Natural Resource Trust Fund also has provided monies for purchasing lands. As with the state forests, purchases of inholdings in existing game areas and the purchases of parcels large enough to create new game areas are the most common types of purchases. Typically, an area of 3,000 or more acres is needed to create a new game or wildlife area. The recreational use of game and wildlife areas has sometimes been a source of controversy. While the areas are almost exclusively paid for by hunters and firearm owners, the major use is not hunting and is not even related to wildlife. Approximately 25% of the use is related to wildlife, including hunting and wildlife viewing. (Lerg et al., 1976). Many other recreational activities, such as hiking, mountain biking, cross-country skiing, fishing, and swimming, also are common. These activities, if they occur during hunting seasons, may conflict with hunting. Hunters view these users as “free riders,” that is, people using the lands and facilities, such as
State and Federal Recreation Areas in Michigan 81
80 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities trails, parking lots, roads, water access sites, without financially supporting them. These other users often view hunters as unwelcome recreationists and have advocated reductions in hunting and shooting activities on some game areas. This situation is compounded by the presence of residential inholdings in many game areas. Many of these residents view the game area as part of their backyard and resent others using the public lands adjacent to theirs. Facilities that once caused no public concern, such as shooting ranges, now bring complaints from new neighbors who may not appreciate the noise or have safety concerns. Recent efforts have been underway to create master plans for each game area by gathering local input while still meeting federal mandates for accepting PR monies. Such plans include keeping lands open to hunting and having a principal management purpose of providing wildlife habitat.
State Park and Recreation Areas
Michigan has 96 state park properties encompassing slightly more than 250,000 acres. They are unlike state forests and state game and wildlife areas, in that they are located throughout the state. There is no point in Michigan where one is more than one hour from a state park or recreation area. The purposes of the parks and recreation areas are to provide outdoor recreation opportunities and to preserve key natural and cultural resources. They are managed by the Parks and Recreation Division of the DNR. To accomplish this, the Division receives approximately $36 million in annual appropriations. The funding for state parks in recent years has caused controversy. In 1979, 30% came from user fees and 70% from general funds. In 1992, the situation was reversed with 80% coming from user fees and 20% from general funds. In addition to increased fees, citizens experienced diminished services. Seasonal and permanent staff were cut due to budget reductions. This resulted in the development of a strategic plan for state parks and the constitutional establishment by Michigan voters of the Gillette State Parks Endowment Fund. This $800 million endowment fund is dedicated solely to Michigan State Parks. The movement for change began in 1989 when the Citizens Committee for Michigan State Parks was appointed by the Director of the DNR to chart the future course for state parks. This course was spelled out in their strategic plan, Vision 2020, released for public review in 1993. The plan advocated seven basic actions:
1. Building a long term stable funding base for Michigan state parks.
2. Making every park a classroom by providing interpretation in every park.
3. Improving and expanding lodging opportunities where appropriate to meet the needs of a more diverse range of overnight visitors.
4. Improving and expanding recreational opportunities where appropriate to meet the recreational needs of a more diverse range of visitors.
5. Establishing priorities for acquisition, retention and disposal of parks where natural or cultural resource value, recreation value, and operating efficiency are the three main criteria in priority order.
6. Establishing a program for natural and cultural resource stewardship for each park in the system.
I 7. Creating a marketing program to understand the needs of current and potential park visitors and match appropriate visitors to appropriate park situations that meet their needs (Citizens Committee for Michigan State Parks, 1993).
The plan was adopted in 1994 by the Michigan Natural Resource Commission, the policy-making body of the DNR. The endowment fund, to provide a stable source for park funding, was approved by the voters in the 1994 general election by a 2:1 margin and amended the Michigan Constitution. This protects the fund from diversions for any other purpose.
Mackinac Island State Park. Michigan’s oldest state park, established in 1875 as a national park and transferred to the state in 1895, is located on Mackinac Island. It is operated by a separate DNR entity, the Mackinac Island State Park Commission. This set of three parks, describing the historical context of the Straits of Mackinac, is one of Michigan’s premiere attractions. Annually the parks are allocated approximately $3.5 million to maintain and interpret these historical facilities. These facilities date back to the early 18th century and figured prominently in the development of colonial North America. The Grand Hotel opened for business in 1887; cars were banned from the Island in 1896. This has made horses, bicycles and walking the primary modes of transportation. In addition, the island lies in Lake Huron, requiring a short boat ride or plane ride to reach it.
State Water Access Sites. State water access sites are managed by the DNR Parks and Recreation Division. This program provides access to inland and Great Lakes waters for boaters and uses complementary to boating, such as fishing and waterskiing. The program provides access to water in two main ways. The first is the public access site program. This is focused on building and maintaining public launches for boats on rivers, lakes and the Great Lakes. Currently the Division manages the majority of the 1, access sites (Talhelm and Vrana, 1995). The Division cooperates with other divisions in DNR and local units of government by constructing access sites on properties these other units manage. The Forest Management Division (primarily through its state forest campgrounds), the state parks, the Wildlife Division (at game and wildlife areas) and many local units of government all operate a sizeable number of access sites. The second way the Division provides water access is through Recreational Harbors on the Great Lakes. These harbors are designed to serve transient boaters on the Great Lakes by providing shelter from storms and temporary dockage or mooring. Often they are located at towns or villages where supplies can be obtained. In addition, they allow the launching of large and small boats into sheltered Great lakes harbors. The goal of the program is to have a harbor of refuge every 15 miles along the Great Lakes shoreline. This goal has been reached, except for some Upper Peninsula shoreline areas. Most of the harbors of refuge were initially constructed by the Division and are now operated by local units of government. Michigan currently maintains 86 public recreational harbors on the Great Lakes (Talhelm and Vrana, 1995).
Great Lakes3
The Great Lakes comprise the largest system of surface freshwater on earth and contain about 5,500 cubic miles of water. Eight states and the Province of Ontario own nearly all of the approximately 94,000 square miles of Great Lakes surface waters and underlying bottomlands.
3 section from Talbeim and Vrana (1995) pp. 25-26.
82 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities The State of Michigan owns about 40 percent of Great Lakes surface waters and bottomlands, including portions of Lake Erie, Lake Huron, Lake Michigan and Lake Superior. Surface waters include all waters above Great Lakes bottomlands, i.e., water column and surface plane of the water body. Bottomlands are submerged lands in the Great Lakes and associated bays and harbors that lie below and lakeward of the ordinary high-water mark. Michigan’s Great Lakes surface waters and bottomlands are managed under a public trust. Public trust is defined in the administrative rule of the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act as the “perpetual duty of the state to secure to its people the prevention of pollution, impairment or destruction of its natural resources, and rights of navigation, fishing, hunting, and use of its lands and waters for other public purposes.” Approximately 1,300 shipwrecks, comprising different types of commercial vessels wrecked since the mid-1800s, lie on Michigan’s Great Lake bottomlands. This number does not include hundreds of sunken pleasure craft. In addition, these waters hold hundreds of submerged wharf and dock sites, middens from shoreline habitation areas and prehistoric sites. These cultural materials are found in excellent condition because the cold, fresh waters of the Great Lakes are a good medium for preservation. Because of the important historical and recreational values provided by these underwater cultural resources, Michigan Public Act 452 of 1988 and P.A. 184 of 1980 (amending P.A. 173 of 1929) were implemented to protect and preserve aboriginal records and antiquities and abandoned property on the bottomlands of the Great Lakes. These acts also created a process for establishing state Great Lakes bottomland preserves (commonly known as underwater preserves). P.A. 452 is administered by the Land and Water Management Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and the Bureau of Michigan History of the Michigan Department of State. State ownership and public trust management authority for shipwrecks was affirmed by the U.S. Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987. There are nine state-administered underwater preserves in Michigan, totaling over 2,000 square miles of surface waters and bottomlands (see Figure 5). Management and development activities associated with the underwater preserves have been coordinated predominantly by community-based support groups called underwater preserve committees (incorporated and unincorporated), in cooperation with the MDNR, Bureau of Michigan History, Michigan Sea Grant Extension, and Michigan State University’s Department of Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources. These local underwater preserve committees are represented by the Michigan Underwater Preserves Council, Inc., a nonprofit corporation established to help promote and develop the preserves and recreational diving.
Federal Areas National Forests
Michigan has four national forests that cover more than 2.7 million acres. The four are Ottawa (Western UP), Hiawatha (Eastern and Central UP), Huron (Northeastern Lower Michigan), and the Manistee (Western Lower Michigan) national forests. These forests were acquired through purchase from willing sellers, in addition to federal lands retained by the federal government that were never in private ownership. The national forests are managed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service under a multiple use concept. Key multiple uses in Michigan include timber, recreation, fish and wildlife, and environmental protection.
84 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities
State and Federal Recreation Areas in Michigan 83 Keweenaw
Thunder Bay
Federally - administered
State -administered
Developing Proposal
Credit: Travel, Tourism, and Recreation Resource Center, Michigan State University, Spotte (1992).
Figure 5. Michigan Underwater Preserves
State and Federal Recreation Areas in Michigan 85
j The importance of recreation in the planning and management of national forests is increasing in Michigan. This is especially true for the Huron and Manistee National Forests in the Northern Lower Peninsula. They are within a few hours driving distance of the great majority of Michigan residents and those of northern Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. Recreational facilities and opportunities on the national forests resemble those found on the state forests. These include motorized and non-motorized trails, rustic campgrounds, and water access sites. Some designated areas are primarily managed for dispersed recreation with an emphasis on solitude and large blocks of public forest land. One indication that the importance of recreation is increasing can be found in the negotiation of forest management plans. Each forest is required by law to produce a management plan every 10 years. The first plans were produced in the late 1980s. Appeals were made on all plans by a wide variety of interests including the forest products industry, the State of Michigan, conservation groups, preservation groups, and recreation groups. In general, the negotiated settlements resulting from the appeals designated more lands to be managed for recreation, especially dispersed and primitive recreation. Conversely, fewer lands were to be managed for intensive timber and oil and gas production. The greatest challenge facing recreation management at the federal level, especially in the national forests, is declining budgets. Unlike Michigan’s state government, which has a balanced budget, the annual federal budget for all purposes is in deficit. While Forest Service recreation efforts represent a minute part of this budget, cutting spending to balance the federal budget and pay the deficit is very difficult. Programs viewed as non-essential by many, such as recreation on national forests, are already feeling the “budget axe.” Unlike the state programs, which have shown the ability to recoup cuts in general fund support from user fees dedicated to a specific program or voter support on ballot issues, the national forests, with few exceptions, are legally required to turn over fee revenues to the general fund of the federal government. Hence, while fees may be increased, the forests and other recreation-related units of the federal government in Michigan are seeing decreases in their appropriations.
National Parks and Lakeshores
Michigan is fortunate to have four areas covering 225,000 acres managed by the National Park Service (NPS), part of the Department of Interior. These areas are Isle Royale National Park (Western UP), the recently established Keewenaw National Historic Park (Western UP), Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore (Eastern UP) and Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Northwestern Lower Michigan). The mission of the NPS differs from the U.S. Forest Service mission of multiple use. Instead, it focuses on one primary purpose, to preserve the resources for the enjoyment of current and future generations. However, the foregoing national areas reflect different NPS philosophies. Isle Royale is a remote island located in the northwest corner of Lake Superior. It is largely undeveloped and primitive. There have been some accommodations made to facilitate visitor usage. This island is owned in its entirety by the federal government and is under the jurisdiction of the NPS. This is the oldest national park in Michigan. In 1964, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore was added to the NPS. This park was created in part from lands previously under the jurisdiction of the USFS, as well as privately owned lands which were purchased by the federal government. This park is actually a narrow strip of land which follows 40 miles of the Lake Superior shoreline. There is a small town located at either end of the park, Grand Marais on the east and Munising on the west. Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore offers a 40-mile backcountry hiking/backpacking trail, in addition to spectacular
j shoreline cliffs which overlook Lake Superior. There are also several large stretches of sandy beach, several inland lakes, and a drive-in primitive campground. Michigan’s newest national park, Keewenaw National Historic Park, was established in 1992—93. It is actually the city of Calumet and its surrounding area. This park is comprised primarily of previously owned land. This area was once a booming metropolis, reflecting the wealth and activity generated during the time that copper was a coveted national resources. During its “heyday,” Calumet played host to many political dignitaries. Its Opera House was the stage for many big name entertainers of the time and there was even talk of making Calumet the capital of the state. Giving this area national park status will help to preserve and protect its rich cultural heritage. Establishing some NPS areas, especially the two national lakeshores, was quite controversial. In the case of the lakeshores, the federal government initially owned little of the land that was planned for incorporation into the park. While some property owners were willing to part with their land at fair market values, many others were not. Hence, the NPS used the power of condemnation (eminent domain) to purchase lands from unwilling sellers. Some lands were purchased with the most rights the Federal Government can obtain in what is called fee simple acquisition. For other properties, where perhaps only a scenic view was important to be preserved, only one right in the property, such as the scenic rights, was purchased. This is called an easement. During the establishment of these lakeshores in the 1970s, the acquisition through eminent domain created a very divisive situation between local communities and the NPS. Today, most of the lands that were to be acquired are now purchased. Many of those living in the area now view the parks as an economic asset and as a positive force restricting development and maintaining the character of the area that initially attracted them. In terms of funding, like the USFS, the NPS also faces the challenges of a federal budget seriously in debt. Many efforts have been made to cut that deficit by trimming spending. However, on a national level, no agency of the Federal government is more revered that the NPS and the “crown jewels” of the nation it administers. This status affords it more protection in budget cutting than is afforded the Forest Service.
National Recreation Area
There also is a National Recreation Area in the Upper Peninsula. Grand Island is located in Munising Bay and is within sight of the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. It became a National Recreation Area in 1990. Grand Island is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service. Among the indigenous wildlife are bald eagle, deer, bear and beaver. Peregrine falcons are being reintroduced to the area. This island receives year-round recreational use. It offers secluded lakeshore campsites with wide expanses of sandy beach, a wide variety of terrain and scenic vistas for mountain bikers, and is an attractive snowmobile area once the narrow channel between the mainland and the island freezes over.
National Wildlife Refuges
There are slightly more than 110,000 acres of national wildlife refuge lands in Michigan. The great majority are in Seney (Eastern UP), with most of the rest in the Shiawassee (East Central Lower Michigan) and Kirtland Warbler (North Central Lower Michigan) Refuges. Islands in the Great Lakes comprise approximately 1% of the refuge acreage with a number of small, scattered locations. These refuges are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a part of the Department of the Interior.
86 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities The Fish and Wildlife Service manages for the primary purpose of providing habitat for targeted wildlife species and enjoyment of that wildlife where appropriate. In particular, the Service has responsibilities in three main areas: migratory birds, marine mammals and rare, threatened and endangered species. Otherwise, the regulatory authority to manage wildlife is in the hands of the states. Hence, the refuges in Michigan reflect the federal mandates. Seney and Shiawassee are concerned primarily with migratory waterfowl and the Kirtland Warbler, the endangered warbler. The island refuges generally support breeding, resting and feeding areas for water birds, some of which are rare, threatened or endangered. Refuges in Michigan have been acquired in two ways. The first is by transfer from one Federal agency to another, such as the Forest Service to the Fish and Wildlife Service in the case of the Kirtland Warbler refuge. The other is by purchase from willing sellers as is the case with much of the land for the Shiawassee refuge. Unlike the national parks and forests, the national wildlife refuges have a stronger financial relationship with certain recreational users. While recreationists’ fees for use of parks and forests are unlikely to stay with the respective agencies, fees that are paid to the Fish and Wildlife Service often flow directly to the refuge system or allied ownerships of the Service such as waterfowl production areas. One key source is through the sale of migratory bird hunting stamps, required of waterfowl hunters more than 15 years of age. This money is “earmarked” or dedicated to the purchase of additional lands, rights in land, or the management of lands to sustain breeding populations of waterfowl. Another is through the Pittman- Robertson Fund, which is a tax on firearms and ammunition that provides money not only to the states, but also to the Fish and Wildlife Service. A third funding source is the Dingell-Johnson fund, an excise tax on fishing equipment that benefits fishing and boating interests. Thus, the recreational clientele of the agency have a direct financial stake in the Fish and Wildlife Service. Other recreationists, such as birders, hikers, photographers, do not directly contribute to the agency’s financial well being. According to national estimates, persons over 15 years old who observe wildlife are estimated to number almost 75 million, those who hunt less than 15 million, and those who fish less than 36 million (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993). On a national basis, the refuges, in spite of their ties to hunters and anglers, are shifting their orientation away from hunting and fishing recreation to accommodating more viewers or to restricting all recreational uses in favor of providing better habitat conditions for wildlife. In Michigan, all the major refuges allow recreational uses thought to be compatible with the primary purpose of providing high quality wildlife habitat for target species. This recreation includes some hunting and fishing on selected portions of the refuges for some legal game species.
Career Opportunities There are several types of career opportunities in state and federal recreation developments. One type is concerned with the overall management and planning of the natural resources, including positions as managers and planners. There also are positions related to the supervision of the areas, such as Ranger and Law Enforcement Officer. Many of these areas also have personnel who service the visitors, such as Interpretive Naturalist, Environmental Education Specialist and Public Information Officer (see chapter 13 for further information). These are typically Civil Service positions that require examinations and progressively responsible experience. Students seeking such jobs are encouraged to seek seasonal positions in the field during their college years. They should also choose an internship that will give them
State and Federal Recreation Areas in Michigan 87 a variety of quality professional experiences under experienced professionals. This experiential education, coupled with work experience and academic courses, is the most likely way to succeed in state or federal service.
References Citizens Committee on Michigan State Parks (1992). Vision 2020—A Strategic Plan for Michigan State Parks. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Department of Natural Resources (1994). Michigan Public Boat Launch Directory. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Department of Natural Resources (1994). Michigan Harbors Guide. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Public Act 265 of 1994. An act to make appropriations to the Department of Natural Resources for the fiscal years ending September 30, 1994 and September 30, 1995.
State Forest Recreation Advisory Committee (1994). Forest Recreation 2000—A Strategic Plan for Michigan’s State Forest Recreation System. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Talhelm, D., and K. Vrana (1995). Boating and Underwater Resources. Special Report No. 77. East Lansing, MI: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, Michigan State University.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1993). 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wild4fe-Associated Recreation. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Well, P., and M. Eidelson (1991). Federal and State Recreation Lands in Michigan in D. Spotts (ed.), Travel and Tourism in Michigan: A Statistical Profile (second edition). Research Monograph No. 2. East Lansing, MI: Michigan Travel, Tourism and Recreation Resource Center, Michigan State University.
88 Recreation in Michigan: Great Professional Opportunities