New Mexico State Parks
Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) 2010 - 2014 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...... iii State of New Mexico Health and Obesity Trends ‐ The Land and Executive Summary ...... 1 Water Conservation Fund and Public Health ...... 21 Planning Methodology and Limitations of the SCORP ...... 1 Economic Impact of Outdoor Recreation ...... 23 Public Meetings and Focus Groups ...... 1 Economic Impact of State Parks and Outdoor Recreation ...... 23 Statewide Community Survey ...... 2 Department of Game and Fish Economic Contributions ...... 23 Federal Funding for Outdoor Recreation ...... 2 Off‐Highway Vehicle (OHV) Economic Contributions ...... 23 State of New Mexico Health and Obesity Trends ...... 2 National Recreation Economic Trends ...... 25 Economic Impact of Obesity ...... 3 Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System ...... 25 New Mexico Demographics ...... 3 Boating Across the United States ...... 25 Recreation in Urban and Rural Areas ...... 4 Golfing as an Industry ...... 25 Economic Impact of State Parks and Outdoor Recreation ...... 4 Equestrian Economics ...... 26 Rio Grande Trail (RGT) ...... 5 Americans are Staying Closer to Home ...... 26 Priorities and Recommendations ...... 6 In New Mexico and the Nation ...... 27 Priority 1 ‐ Promote the Livability of All Communities Through New Mexico’s Key Statistics and Outdoor Recreation Trends ..... 27 Health and Fitness ...... 7 New Mexico’s SCORP Managing Agencies ...... 29 Priority 2 – Enhance Economic Vitality ...... 7 Role of SCORP in Allocating Funds ...... 29 Priority 3 ‐ Properly Use and Conserve Natural Resources ...... 7 Who are the Partners in the SCORP? ...... 29 Priority 4 – Develop a Statewide Trail Network That Facilitates State‐wide Demographics ...... 31 Recreation, Transportation and Healthy Lifestyles ...... 8 Central Service Area ...... 33 Critical Ingredients for Success ...... 8 Northwest Service Area ...... 35 Education ...... 8 Northeast Service Area ...... 36 Funding ...... 9 Southwest Service Area ...... 37 Foreword ...... 11 Southeast Service Area ...... 38 Planning Context ...... 13 Public Outreach ...... 41 What is a SCORP? ...... 13 Public Meetings and Focus Groups ...... 41 Previous SCORP ...... 13 Participation Barriers ...... 41 Planning Methodology and Constraints ...... 13 Community Survey ...... 43 Goals and Objectives of the SCORP ...... 14 Statewide Outreach Efforts ...... 43 What is Expected of the SCORP? ...... 14 Random Sample Survey Response ...... 43 Planning Components ...... 15 LWCF Agency, Open‐link Web, and Sovereign Nations Survey Reflections from the SCORP ...... 15 Responses ...... 43 Federal Funding for Outdoor Recreation ...... 17 Response Analysis ...... 44 Historic LWCF Funding for New Mexico ...... 17 Key Survey Findings ...... 44 New Mexico’s Recreation Providers ...... 19 Importance‐Satisfaction Matrix ...... 48 Importance and Relevance of Outdoor Recreation...... 21 Service Area Analysis ...... 49
2010 – 2014 SCORP i
Northwest Service Area Needs ...... 49 Recommendation 1 ‐ Verify the Inventory ...... 79 Northeast Service Area Needs ...... 50 Action Step 1 – Complete Inventory Database ...... 79 Central Service Area Needs ...... 50 Action Step 2 ‐ Reach Out to Sovereign Nations ...... 79 Southwest Service Area Needs ...... 51 Action Step 3 – Track Visitor and Participation Statistics ...... 79 Southeast Service Area Needs ...... 52 Recommendation 2 – Pursue LWCF Projects for Smaller Local Government Survey ‐ Capacity Analysis ...... 53 Communities ...... 79 Limitations of the Survey ...... 53 Action Step 1 ‐ Promote in Small Communities ...... 79 Capacity ...... 53 Action Step 2 ‐ Fill Service Gaps ...... 80 Local Government Issues ...... 55 Action Step 3 – Coordinate Trail Efforts ...... 80 County Government Issues ...... 55 Recommendation 3 ‐Structure and Coordinate Planning ...... 80 State Parks Issues ...... 55 Action Step 1 – Participate in Statewide Collaborations ...... 80 Federal Agencies and National Forests Issues ...... 55 Recommendation 4 ‐ Conduct Further Analysis ...... 80 Local Government Program Needs ...... 55 Action Step 1 – Address Fishing ...... 80 County Government Program Needs ...... 55 Action Step 2 – Address Picnicking and Relaxation Areas ...... 80 State Parks Program Needs...... 55 Action Step 3 – Address Hunting ...... 81 Federal Agencies/National Forests Program Needs ...... 56 Action Step 4 – Address Camping ...... 81 Inventory and Level of Service by Region ...... 57 Recommendation 5 – Address Connecting Children to Nature . 81 Limitations of the Inventory Data Collection ...... 58 Action Step 1 – Outdoor Education ...... 81 Statewide Inventory Captured ...... 58 Appendix A – Alternative Funds and Resources ...... 83 Resource Maps ...... 59 Appendix B ‐ Outdoor Recreation Industry Trends ...... 91 Mandates and Key Issues Matrix ...... 69 Appendix C ‐ Recreation Age Trends and Population Americans with Disabilities Act ...... 69 Characteristics ...... 113 Forest Service Accessibility Resources ...... 70 Appendix D ‐ New Mexico Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Key Issues Identified ...... 70 Recreation Plan (SCORP) Update Survey Final Results ‐ July 2009 The Findings ...... 73 ...... 117 Priorities ...... 75 Appendix E ‐ Government Information Request for New Mexico Priority 1 ‐ Promote the Livability of All Communities Through SCORP ...... 179 Health and Fitness ...... 75 Appendix F ‐ Inventory Data Collection Limitations ...... 183 Priority 2 – Enhance Economic Vitality ...... 75 Appendix G ‐ New Mexico Inventory Maps ...... 185 Priority 3 – Properly Use and Conserve Natural Resources ...... 76 Appendix H ‐ New Mexico Wetlands Component ...... 211 Priority 4 – Develop a Statewide Trail Network That Facilitates Recreation, Transportation and Healthy Lifestyles ...... 76 Critical Ingredients for Success ...... 76 Education ...... 77 Funding ...... 77 Recommendations and Action Steps ...... 79 ii State of New Mexico
Acknowledgements Thanks to our Outdoor Recreation Partners:
USDA ‐ Forest Service The preparation of this plan was financed in part through a Land Bureau of Land Management and Water Conservation Fund planning grant, and the plan was Bureau of Reclamation approved by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the National Park Service Interior under the provisions for the Federal Land and Water Army Corp of Engineers Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (Public Law 88‐578). New Mexico State Game and Fish
New Mexico State Land Office The New Mexico Department of Energy, Minerals & Natural New Mexico Wilderness Alliance Resources acknowledges the significant contributions made by New Mexico State Department of Tourism those who committed their time and expertise to help update New Recreational Equipment Incorporated (REI) Mexico’s official Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation
Plan. Many agencies, organizations, and individuals, as indicated on this page have made particularly valuable contributions to this document.
Lastly, we wish to recognize the countless hours devoted to the SCORP by the staff of the New Mexico State Parks Division, Dave Simon, State Parks Director; Dave Gatterman, Bureau Chief, Design and Development; Christy Tafoya, Education & Resource Protection Program Manager; Cynthia Lovely, Parks Planner, and the writing and editorial contributions of Maurice (Moses) A. Mondary, Grants “New Mexico ‐‐ the Land of Enchantment” Manager /Trails Administrator and State Liaison Officer, Field
Support Bureau, New Mexico State Parks Division.
New Mexico State Parks: Short Trips. Long Memories; SCORP Advisory Committee Your Best Recreation Value Close to Home
Bob Anderson, Chief, Recreation Grants Division, NPS, Omaha Office Jane Beu, Outdoor Recreation Planner, NPS, Omaha Office Ed Chismar, Director Parks and Recreation Department, Bernalillo County, President‐Elect, New Mexico Recreation & Park Association Jay Hart, (Past) Director Parks and Recreation Department, City of Albuquerque, NM Kim Elliott, Director Parks and Recreation Department, Roswell, NM Rob Carter, Director Parks and Recreation Department, Clovis, NM
2010 – 2014 SCORP i
2010 – 2014 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) Executive Summary
City of Rocks State Park
Therefore, a decision was made to use the time available to lay the foundation for future,e mor comprehensive, data collection ‐ the rationale being that this approach would be the most effective first step toward what is ultimately targeted to be a more complete and accurate accounting of the outdoor recreation resources of all suppliers. For the next SCORP update, an earlier start‐up date, improved comprehensive project planning, increased project scope, and a more generous timeline will be dedicated to advertising and promoting the benefits of participating in the SCORP steering process, stakeholder and community meetings, user surveys, and the inventory updating process. This will hopefully result in an Executive Summary opportunity to enhance the data collection and verification by allowing for better face‐to‐face contact on a statewide level with the federal, state, county, municipal, and local providers in New Planning Methodology and Limitations of the SCORP Mexico. The goal of the 2010‐2014 SCORP was to create a comprehensive statewide plan that compared the results of a statewide community Public Meetings and Focus Groups survey of outdoor parks and recreation usage, needs, and barriers, April 27‐29, 2009 ‐ Northern Portion of the State: with an extensive inventory of recreational trails, wetlands, and (Farmington, Santa Fe, Las Vegas, and Santa Rosa) outdoor recreation facilities from all providers for outdoor June 1‐5, 2009 ‐ Southern Portion of the State: recreation programs and facilities in New Mexico, including (Roswell, Las Cruces, and Socorro) nonprofit and private providers. One of the end results was to be a
verified inventory of all federal, state, county, municipal, and local The following questions were discussed: providers in one database that could then be mapped and analyzed What do you value about outdoor recreation in New Mexico? for capacity and level of service. What is your future vision regarding outdoor recreation?
What are the barriers to service? Unfortunately, due to staff vacancies in the Grant Section of the Who are the private and nonprofit providers? New Mexico State Parks, a one‐year extension of the existing SCORP What new things have you seen in outdoor parks and was needed to complete the update process by December 31, 2009. recreation lately? However, a delayed contracting process further eroded the process, In terms of outdoor recreation, what would be good for the making it difficult to get the New Mexico SCORP underway. This left whole community? a compressed project timeline with a fast track schedule of roughly
six months to conduct the necessary meetings, surveys, and to
update the inventory in order to complete the SCORP by December
31, 2009.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 1
Outdoor recreation resources and opportunities are extremely In the last 40 years, New Mexico has received almost $41 million important to those that attended. The impact of these amenities from the LWCF program. Those grants have leveraged an additional and services on people’s quality of life, environmental issues, and $41 million from state, local, and tribal governments through healthy living makes outdoor recreation an essential service to matching funds for a total of $82 million invested in outdoor citizens. New Mexico boasts many diverse types of activities and recreation. One hundred percent (100%) of all counties in New environments. As a result, outdoor recreation services contribute Mexico have benefited from LWCF funding since 1965. greatly to the State’s economy. Trends Impacting Outdoor Recreation: Statewide Community Survey Four separate outreach efforts were used to conduct the • Health and Obesity community survey portion of the outdoor recreation needs assessment, which included: • Need for Diverse Recreation Opportunities A statistically‐valid Random Sample Survey mailed to 8,000 • Urban and Rural Recreation statewide residents with a postage‐paid return envelope • Growing Support for Outdoor Recreation addressed to the survey firm RRC Associates in Boulder, CO with a passwordd protecte online web option. • Diminished Connection to Nature A survey mailed to Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) agency database of those who have received this Compelling Trends: type of Federal funding in New Mexico. Open‐Link Web Survey on the New Mexico State Parks New Mexicans’ increasingly sedentary lifestyles and website. disconnection from nature are resulting in alarming health Sovereign Nations outreach including 500 surveys declines and a diminished conservation ethic. proportioned by population to the Navajo Nation agencies and chapters, Pueblos, and Apache tribes. State of New Mexico Health and Obesity Trends The obesity epidemic and healthy aging are critical issues facing Federal Funding for Outdoor Recreation New Mexicans. In addition, it appears that projects that are “close Federal funds for outdoor recreation are made available through to home” may have the greatest statewide appeal. Therefore, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). States are eligible smaller local projects, trail connections, fishing ponds and river for these funds based upon approval of SCORP. In New Mexico, the access, restrooms, trailheads, and looped park trails may provide agency responsible for SCORP is the State Parks Division of the the largest community reach and provide additional opportunities Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD). The for healthy and active lifestyles. Nature deficit disorder and division uses the funds to help state, local, and tribal governments connecting children to nature are critical issues facing New acquire, develop, and rehabilitate recreation facilities and Mexicans. resources.
2 State of New Mexico
The Center for Disease Control reported that New Mexico had a 24 Economic Impact of Obesity percent obesity rate for adults in 2007. Obesity is defined as having “An estimated $324 million is spent in New Mexico annually on a body mass index of greater than or equal to 30 percent of total medical expenditures that are attributable to obesity in adults, with body weight. Further, the United Health Foundation has ranked $52 million spent within the Medicare population and $84 million in New Mexico 29th in its 2007 State Health Rankings. This is up nine the Medicaid population. The economic burden of obesity suggests rankings from 2006. that environmental and policy changes that reduce barriers to being physically active and choosing healthful foods and beverages are The State’s strengths include: required in communities and at schools and work sites, and in the Strong per capita public health funding. food industry and health care systems throughout the state.”1 Low levels of air pollution. Low rates of cancer deaths and cardiovascular deaths. Urbanization and Rural demographic shifts are creating a greater Some of the challenges the State faces include: demand for outdoor recreation opportunities and the need for High rate of uninsured population. diverse recreational offerings. Low high school graduation rate. High violent crime rate. New Mexico Demographics These are some factors that drive the need for diverse recreation According to the NM Department of Health’s, The State of Health opportunities: in New Mexico 2009, Weight Status, “In 2007, significantly fewer high school students in New Mexico were obese (10.9%) than Roughly seven percent of the residents are under five years nationally (13.0%). In addition, fewer New Mexico high school of age, while over 25 percent are under 18 years old. students were overweight (13.5%) than high school students Almost 13 percent are 65 years and older, and this group nationally (15.8%). [However] This difference is driven mainly by will be increasing at a fast rate. Current population lower rates among non‐Hispanic White students in New Mexico, projections suggest that this group will grow .7 percent by who experience the lowest rate of weight problems (combined the year 2013. obesity and overweight: 18.6%), followed by Hispanic (26.0%) and Over 30 percent of residents earn below $25,000 a year, American Indian students (32.4%). with approximately 43 percent earning less than $35,000. It is estimated that almost 18 percent of the population falls Over 60% of New Mexican adults were overweight or obese (35.7% below the poverty line, almost five percent more than the and 25.1%, respectively) compared with over 62% nationally (36.6% nation. overweight and 26.3% obese) in 2007. Over the last decade, the Almost 11 percent of the population are Native American rates of overweight and obesity have increased across the nation as Indians living on or off of a reservation, pueblo, or on tribal well as in New Mexico. Among subpopulations, American Indian land, as compared with the United States average of one (32.8%) and Hispanic (30.0%) adults in the state experience percent. significantly higher obesity rates than non‐Hispanic White (20.5%).”
1 The State of Health in New Mexico 2009, New Mexico Department of Health
2010 – 2014 SCORP 3
Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin represent over 44 There is a difference between outdoor recreation planning issues percent of the population versus 15 percent for the nation. for urbanized and rural areas. For New Mexico’s smaller and more rural communities, the lack of fiscal as well as human resources The demographic profile of recreation users also emerged as a makes the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities possibly important planning issue. Concern was expressed for both challenging. For these communities, the Land and Water the potential challenges of providing recreational activities for the Conservation Fund is one of the few known funding sources for aging baby‐boomers as well as the need to provide more facilities outdoor recreation investments. However, because of the limited and activities for youth. Around the state, outdoor recreation was budgets for smaller communities, the 50/50 match required by the viewed as critical to positive youth development. It plays an LWCF can pose a hardship. important role in both providing youth with positive outlets for their energy as well as instilling an outdoor environmental ethic at an Of further concern to funding agencies, however, is that the lack of early age. On the opposite side of the age spectrum, providing for human and fiscal capacity for smaller communities complicates both an increasingly active but growing senior population means the creation of new recreational areas and maintenance of existing retrofitting existing areas to accommodate the different needs of ones. While LWCF might provide a temporary solution for a small this population segment. community struggling to add a trail or recreational facility, LWCF cannot solve the long term problem of local municipalities’ fiscal Recreation in Urban and Rural Areas challenges with recreation area maintenance and land stewardship. New Mexico is the 5th largest state in land area with approximately 122,000 square miles. The 2000 Census shows New Mexico ranked Economic Impact of State Parks and Outdoor Recreation at 36th with a total population of 1,819,046. Approximately one‐ According to NM State Parks Division data, “Seventy third of the population lives in the urbanized area of Albuquerque, percent of New Mexicans live within 40 miles of a State Bernalillo County, and Sandoval County (Rio Rancho and Corrales). Park. “ Approximately one‐third of the population lives in small to medium Forty percent of New Mexico’s state residents participate in urban clusters ranging from 2,500 to over 100,000 residents. These wildlife‐associated recreation, both inside and outside of urban clusters are scattered around the state with the largest New Mexico. concentration in Southeastern New Mexico. The remainder of the Outdoor recreation supports 47,000 jobs across New state’s population largely lives in areas very rural in nature. Mexico and generates $184 million in annual New Mexico state tax revenue. The outdoor recreation industry produces $2.75 billion annually in retail sales and services across New Mexico – accounting for 4.6% of gross state product. Visitors to the New Mexico State Parks have been steadily increasing since 2005.
4 State of New Mexico
Except for those with direct economic interests, people often fail to Rated highest was providing trail amenities (benches, trash consider the importance that outdoor recreation holds for local containers, drinking fountains, dog pick‐up bag dispensers, signage, economies. In parts of New Mexico, outdoor recreation and tourism etc.—66% very important). Next was improving trail maintenance have long played an important economic development role. Many (64%), improving trail connectivity between towns and of New Mexico’s smaller and more rural communities are “gateway neighborhoods (63%), building neighborhood trails (62%), adding or communities” that are located near an access point to an outdoor expanding trailheads (60%), building more soft surface trails (58%), recreation site such as the national forest, a reservoir, ski area or improving trail connectivity to regional trails outside of your town historic site and usually derive a good measure of their community (58%), and building regional trail systems (56%). Rated lowest was income from supporting outdoor recreation activities through building more paved trails (43% very important and 40% not lodger’s taxes, gross receipts taxes, and employment in businesses important). that sell supplies or provide hospitality services. The USDA Forest Service, National Park Service, NM State Parks, Need for a Statewide Trail System That Promotes Recreation and Department of Tourism Scenic Byways and local and tribal Healthy Lifestyles. governments all have efforts underway to provide recreational and According to New Mexico Statute, “The purpose of the State Trails historical trails within their areas of responsibility. Within New System Act [16‐3‐1 to 16‐3‐9 NMSA 1978] is to provide public access Mexico the popularity of multi‐use trails has increased the demand to, and the enjoyment and appreciation eof, th New Mexico for more open space and trails, especially near urban areas. outdoors in order to conserve, develop, and use the natural However, there is no statewide coordinated plan to interconnect resources of the state for purposes of health and recreation. It is the the trails on a statewide basis. intent and purpose of the State Trails System Act to encourage horseback riding, hiking, bicycling, and other recreational There is a trail effort underway that has the potential to provide activities. “ connectivity across a major portion of the state. That initiative is the Rio Grande Trail (RGT). Once again, trails are an important issue for the residents of New Mexico. According to the 2010‐2014 SCORP survey question What Rio Grande Trail (RGT) About Trails, respondents were asked to indicate how important The Rio Grande, a true American river, is the second largest river various aspects of trail improvements in New Mexico were to them system in the country. Of its over 1,800 total miles, nearly 500 miles and their household. Eight of the nine categories were rated of the Rio Grande form the heart of New Mexico—the primary relatively important to the respondents overall, with 56 to 66 drainage feature and the state’s most valuable natural and cultural percent responses of 4 or 5 “very important” on the 5‐point scale. resource. The Rio Grande is a precious lifeline that connects nature, At the same time, a certain percentage of the population (generally history, culture, and communities across millennia. around 20%) considered most of the trail amenities as not important (ratings of 1 or 2).
2010 – 2014 SCORP 5
One relatively newer use and benefit from the Rio Grande is Additionally, the RGT would provide a foundation to connect with recreation. The river and its bosque attract and sustain a wide other area and community trails along the proposed corridor. A variety of recreation—from hunting and fishing to river rafting to major challenge is the cost of the RGT is estimated at close to $200 hiking, biking, and horseback riding. In many ways, human million. recreation in the river corridor also provides a vital connection to experiencing and appreciating the river, and educating the public about its past, present, and future.
In June 2006, Governor Bill Richardson and New Mexico State Parks, which administers the State Trails System Act, proposed the establishment of the RGT, which would roughly parallel the Rio Grande. The basic infrastructure of the trail already exists in many locations via the levee systems and informal trail networks of the irrigation districts and on some publicly owned land. The New Mexico Legislature has provided limited funding in order to begin planning and development of the project. Priorities and Recommendations A multi‐use trail along the Rio Grande has the potential to replicate It is imperative for local, state, and federal governments to work successful long‐distance trails in other states. Trails increase collaboratively with private sector organizations to secure a future opportunities for healthy living and create a sense of community in where New Mexicans live healthier lifestyles, the economic well the areas through which they pass. Long‐distance trails often serve being of communities is sustained, and wildlife and natural locally as venues for community activities, fundraisers and other resources are conserved. special events, while long‐distance trail users in need of supplies, lodging and food boost riverside community economies. Trails that connect schools, businesses, and parks provide environmentally 1 2 friendly alternative transportation and offer increased fitness Promote the Livability of Enhance opportunities. Trails that follow waterways can easily provide All Communities Economic fishing and boating access as well as a parallel water trail for canoes Through Vitality Health and Fitness and kayaks. Finally, trail‐based interpretation efforts could reconnect the public to the significance of the river and go hand‐in‐ hand with the restoration, protection and beautification of the riparian corridor. 3 Properly Use and 4 Developing a Statewide Conserve Natural Resources Trail System
6 State of New Mexico
Priority 1 ‐ Promote the Livability of All Communities Increase education/knowledge of the benefits/values of Through Health and Fitness outdoor recreation in terms of economic impact. Rehabilitate, update, and upgrade existing public outdoor Key Recommendations: recreation facilities to maximize marketability. Rehabilitate, update, and upgrade existing public outdoor Priority 3 ‐ Properly Use and Conserve Natural Resources recreation facilities to maximize public participation. Continued expansion or development of new multi‐use urban trails networks. Key Recommendations: Improve access to outdoor recreation resources and facilities by Develop structured and coordinated planning methods, establishing parks to develop programs that promote health networking opportunities, and advocacy efforts for outdoor and livability and to incorporate those programs into state and recreation issues, resources, and management to better serve local outdoor recreation. all providers. Create more opportunities for youth to engage in outdoor Develop a dynamic, comprehensive inventory of all outdoor activities. recreation amenities, including federal, state, and local trails Attend to segments of the population that are under‐served by and facilities, using GIS to identify areas lacking access to public existing facilities (e.g., seniors, young adults, Latinos, and Native parks. American populations). Expand the SCORP inventory of outdoor recreation resources Work with statewide organizations such as the Department of and other GIS databases to identify lands suitable for Health, Department of Human Services, New Mexico Recreation conservation. and Park Association, and others to develop programs that Identify and prioritize key lands for acquisition that will promote health and livability. conserve natural areas, expand, and enhance the current State Build more outdoor classrooms, trails, and playgrounds Park system. featuring outdoor recreation skills. Identify and prioritize key lands for acquisition that will conserve natural areas, particularly in the fastest growing areas Priority 2 – Enhance Economic Vitality of the state. Increase/improve communication/collaboration between Key Recommendations: providers and partners. Increase education/knowledge of the benefits /values of Continue to promote outdoor recreation events, programs, and outdoor recreation in terms of human character and health. facilities that attract day travelers and overnight visitation by
creating partnerships with businesses such as convention and
visitor bureaus, recreation equipment vendors, and guide
services. Conduct new or update existing research on the economic benefits of outdoor recreation in New Mexico.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 7
Priority 4 – Develop a Statewide Trail Network That Critical Ingredients for Success Facilitates Recreation, Transportation and Healthy Lifestyles Commitment Key Recommendations: Engage in collaboration among agencies with common missions to Support the ongoing legislation to update the State Trails Act develop the synergy needed for all New Mexicans to have access to into a comprehensive mandate for trails. quality outdoor recreation resources that meet their needs. Provide trails that connect neighborhoods, schools, shopping areas and workplaces within communities. Key strategies include: Provide connections between existing trails, or closes a gap • Pursue and support the ongoing legislation to update the within an existing trail system. State Trails Act into a comprehensive mandate for Build trails that access open spaces or, provide access to remote establishing and funding trails in New Mexico. areas (parks, forests, game lands, etc.). • Pursue Outdoor Recreation Partnerships to strengthen Provide convenient trailheads and access points. implementation of the priorities from SCORP. • Enhance ENMRD SPD efforts to provide statewide recreation research, planning, and technical assistance services. • Explore alternative funding sources, ways to improve service delivery, and means to maximize the benefits that outdoor recreation has on local communities.
Education Pursue cooperation and collaborations to share tools and resources to conserve recreation lands and provide high quality opportunities for all. By heightening the awareness of recreation’s benefits for community health and livability, economic vitality, and conservation of our natural resources, we will elevate the priority of outdoor recreation with policymakers, planners, practitioners, partners, and the public.
8 State of New Mexico
Key strategies include: • Provide balanced interpretation, education, and outdoor recreation programs to expand the knowledge and appreciation of New Mexico’s natural and recreational resources in a manner consistent with the conservation of the resource. • Work with the Public Education Department to advance healthy lifestyles and natural resource conservation in New Mexico’s classrooms.
Funding We must act now to use funds efficiently at all levels of government, leverage with other private and non‐profit investments and seek consistent funding to guarantee outdoor recreation for current and future generations.
Key strategies include: • Work with the Governor’s Office, state legislative leaders, and other funding agencies to maximize existing funds and develop new funding resources that support state and local recreation land acquisition, conservation and development, rehabilitation, and maintenance projects. • Pursue full permanent funding for NMSA1978, 16‐1‐2, State Supplemental Land and Water Conservation Fund. • Pursue permanent funding through reauthorizing, updating the Laws 1973, Chapter 372; NMSA1978, 16‐3‐1, State Trails System Act to include creation of Section 8, State Trails System Fund. • Create and sustain partnerships to minimize reliance on tax revenues to support the operation and maintenance cof publi parks and outdoor recreation areas. • Advocate for the continuation of state and local funding assistance through the Land and Water Conservation Fund program and other federal programs that support outdoor recreation opportunities in New Mexico.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 9
2010 – 2014 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP)
Eagle Nest Lake State
Foreword We are proud of the variety of culturally rich resources and services in the State that serve the outdoor recreation needs of close to two Under the terms of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act million residents each year. Additionally, both residents and visitors (LWCF) of 1965 that established the LWCF State Assistance enjoy day use and overnight camping opportunities provided by the Program, each state is required to develop a Statewide federal, state, county, local, and sovereign nation parks, as well as Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) at least every five private, nonprofit providers and ski resorts. Additionally, there are years. The intent of this plan is to justify state and federal countless outdoor swimming pools, trails, and diverse outdoor expenditures for outdoor recreation based upon an analysis of the recreation programs and facilities available on a daily basis. following criteria. 1) Assessment of the existing supply of Whether individuals are working out, taking an environmental recreational opportunities using broad‐based public, provider, and education class, camping, competing in a sports league, playing a user feedback in relation to recreation trends, deficiencies, under‐ round of golf, enjoying a walk through a neighborhood park, or served areas, and desired improvements, and 2) Conducting an simply renting a picnic shelter, there is an activity or service for inventory of current recreation facilities, trails, and wetlands. everyone!
Since 1967, the New Mexico State Parks Division has continually updated its SCORP, which defines how state, federal, local, and "The park and recreation movement is more essential today than tribal governmental agencies cooperate to provide for the outdoor ever before. The need to protect and promote our natural recreation needs and demands of the state. The goal of each plan resources and open spaces remains paramount. In addition, we was to compare the results of a statewide survey of outdoor parks now face a serious problem of sedentariness that is and recreation usage, needs, and barriers, with an extensive disproportionately impacting America’s youth, and this is where inventory of all providers for outdoor recreation programs and the National Park and Recreation Foundation, along with the other facilities in New Mexico, including nonprofit and private providers. partners in this movement, plays a critical role." The resulting needs assessment and gap analysis demonstrates the spirit of cooperation among all providers and serves as a roadmap R. Dean Tice, Life Trustee to justify future funding and development requests from Recreation (NRPA Executive Director, 1986‐2001) Trails funds, Transportation Enhancement funds, and other federal, state, and local funding and planning resources as well as the LWCF.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 11
Planning Context
What is a SCORP? Previous SCORP Under the terms of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act The 2004‐2009 SCORP was prepared by a research team from the (LWCF) of 1965 that established the LWCF State Assistance Community and Regional Planning Program at the University of New Program, each state is required to develop a Statewide Mexico School of Architecture and Planning. Relevant background Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) at least every five and historic information regarding the SCORP and the importance of years. The intent of this plan is to justify state and federal outdoor recreation still applies and is not repeated in this update. expenditures based upon an analysis of the existing supply of recreational opportunities using broad‐based public, provider, and Planning Methodology and Constraints user input regarding recreation trends, deficiencies, under‐served The goal of the 2010‐2014 SCORP was to create a comprehensive areas, and desired improvements, and an inventory of current statewide plan that compared the results of a statewide community recreation facilities, trails, and wetlands. Since 1967, the New survey of outdoor parks and recreation usage, needs, and barriers, Mexico State Parks Division has commissioned a SCORP which with an extensive inventory of recreational trails, wetlands, and outlines how state, federal, local, and tribal governmental agencies outdoor recreation facilities from all providers for outdoor cooperate to provide for the outdoor recreation needs and recreation programs and facilities in New Mexico including demands of the State. nonprofit and private providers. One of the end results was to be a verified inventory of all federal, state, county, municipal, and local The LWCF Act explicitly requires the SCORP to include: providers in one database that could then be mapped and analyzed a. The name of the state agency that will have the authority to for capacity and level of service. represent and act for the State in dealing with the Secretary for purposes of the LWCF Act of 1965, as amended. Unfortunately, due to staff vacancies in the Grant Section of the b. Inventory of statewide outdoor recreation facilities. New Mexico State Parks, a one‐year extension of the existing SCORP c. Wetlands priority inventory. was needed to complete the update process by December 31, 2009. d. An evaluation of the demand for and supply of outdoor However, a delayed contracting process further eroded the process, recreation resources and facilities in the State. making it difficult to get the New Mexico SCORP underway. This left e. A program for the implementation of the plan. a compressed project timeline with a fast track schedule of roughly f. Certification by the Governor that ample opportunity for six months to conduct the necessary meetings, surveys, and to public participation has taken place in plan development. update the inventory in order to complete the SCORP by December g. Other necessary information, as may be determined by the 31, 2009. Secretary.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 13
Therefore, a decision was made to use the time available to lay the What is Expected of the SCORP? foundation for future more comprehensive data collection. The The planning process must include ample opportunity for public rationale being that this approach would be the most effective first participation involving all segments of the state’s population. step toward what is ultimately targeted to be a more complete and accurate accounting of the outdoor recreation resources of all The plan must be comprehensive. The plan will be considered suppliers. For the next SCORP update, an earlier start‐up date, comprehensive if it: improved comprehensive project planning, increased project scope, and a more generous timeline will be dedicated to advertising and a. Identifies outdoor recreation issues of statewide promoting the benefits of participating in the SCORP steering importance based upon, but not limited to, input from the process, stakeholder and community meetings, user surveys, and public participation program. The plan must also identify the inventory updating process. This will hopefully result in an those issues the state will address through the LWCF and opportunity to enhance the data collection and verification by those issues that may be addressed by other means. allowing for better face‐to‐face contact on a statewide level with b. Evaluates demand, i.e., public outdoor recreation the federal, state, county, municipal, and local providers in New preferences, but not necessarily through quantitative Mexico. statewide surveys or analyses. c. Evaluates the supply of outdoor recreation resources and Goals and Objectives of the SCORP facilities,t bu not necessarily through quantitative statewide The goals of the SCORP and its associated planning process are to inventories. direct each state's use of its LWCF apportionment. The objectives of the SCORP and its associated planning process are to:
a. Fulfill the purposes of the LWCF Act. b. Provide each state the maximum opportunity and flexibility to develop and implement its plan. c. Describe the role of the LWCF in the state’s provision of outdoor recreation resources and the state’s policies for use of its LWCF apportionment. d. Provide a basis for determining each state’s LWCF eligibility. e. Ensure relevant, influential, and timely planning for the state’s use of its LWCF apportionment.
14 State of New Mexico
Planning Components Reflections from the SCORP Needs Assessment/Public Outreach/Focus Group Meetings. The New Mexico SCORP reflects the current state of the economy Stakeholder Surveys: and consequently focuses more on improvements to existing o Customized to address New Mexico’s residents infrastructure, linkages, cooperative provision strategies, and and outdoor recreation users. sustainability than growth and development. New Mexico’s large o Allowed sub‐analysis by the five service areas of land mass coupled with relatively small population density, along the state, and by respondent characteristics. with the socio‐economic conditions of New Mexico strains available o Provided a website response option. local resources, as a considerable amount of the state has small, o Provided respondents an opportunity to win rural, spread‐out communities. Often, a state or national park acts either a day‐use pass or a coupon for eon night of as a local or regional facility for these rural areas, and free camping at a New Mexico state park for transportation is another major barrier. participating in the survey. Market and Demographic Analysis: o Five distinct service areas: . Central (Bernalillo County/Albuquerque) . Northwest . Northeast . Southeast . Southwest o Sources of information included 2000 Census and ESRI Business Solutions. Inventory and Level of Service (LOS) Analysis of Existing Conditions for Outdoor Recreation Spaces/Facilities, Wetlands, and Trails– Gap Analysis. Outdoor Recreation Providers Identification. Assumptions and Visioning Workshops. Financial Management Analysis. Recommendations & Action Plan.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 15
Federal Funding for Outdoor Recreation Historic LWCF Funding for New Mexico Federal funds for outdoor recreation are made available through Since its inception, annual appropriations to the Fund have ranged the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). States are eligible from a high of $369 million in 1979 to four years of zero funding for these funds based upon approval of SCORP. In New Mexico, the between 1996 and 1999. The LWCF experienced significant agency responsible for SCORP is the State Parks Division of the increases in Congressional appropriations for state and local grants Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD). The during the 2000‐2002 fiscal years (FY), peaking at $140 million in FY division uses the funds to help state, local, and tribal governments 2002. However, beginning in FY 2003, and continuing through FY acquire, develop, and rehabilitate recreation facilities and 2008, funding for LWCF state grants dropped to $23 million, the resources. lowest figure since FY 1992 except for the zero years noted above. Table 1 shows the annual stateside LWCF appropriations for New In the last 40 years, New Mexico has received almost $41 million Mexico from 2002 to 2009. Supplemental apportionment pursuant from the LWCF program. Those grants have leveraged an additional to the Gulf of New Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMSEA) was $41 million from state, local, and tribal governments through appropriated in 2009. matching funds for a total of $82 million invested in outdoor recreation. One hundred percent (100%) of all counties in New Table 1: NM LWCF Annual Apportionment 2002‐2009 Mexico have benefited from LWCF funding since 1965. Fiscal Year Appropriation GOMSEA 2009 $ 218,632 $ 94,373 New Mexico is one of 14 states with no dedicated source of funds 2008 $ 266,457 for its parks and recreation agencies. LWCF is a 50% Federal/ 50% 2007 $ 322,708 State/Local match program. For many of New Mexico’s local 2006 $ 322,708 governments, the 50% match can represent a budgetary burden 2005 $1,037,078 due to their current and forecasted economic constraints. 2004 $1,055,871 2003 $1,048,717 Currently, the unmet needs for outdoor recreation facilities and 2002 $1,555,060 parkland acquisition for the State of New Mexico are estimated to Source: http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf total $35.5 million. The LWCF Stateside Program has never been adequately funded. In fact from 1996 thru 1999, there were no apportioned LWCF funds
“It’s not how much we spend but how we take care made available to the State Assistance Program. Additionally, during
of the areas we use.” the Bush Administration, from 2000 thru 2008, there were no LWCF State Assistance Program funds in the President’s Budget. It was only through the intervention of Congress that the State Assistance Program received the $20 million to $30 million annual apportionment that was distributed to all the 50 states and territories.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 17
According to the 2009 Land & Water Conservation Fund Coalition Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing Report, “LWCF funding has been low and unpredictable over the revenues authorized by Congress to fund the LWCF at $900 program’s forty‐four year history, approaching the full funding level million annually should be permanently dedicated to this of $900 million only twice. In the past ten years, program funding purpose. Historically, almost all of this funding has been has followed a dramatic decline, with a total of less than $155 diverted into general revenues for other purposes. In Fiscal Year million in Fiscal Year 2008. Meanwhile, demand for these funds to 2008, the Department of the Interior collected $23.4 billion protect our nation’s most treasured natural, cultural, and recreation from onshore and offshore energy production, more than areas has skyrocketed. In the face of often intense development doubling the 2007 total of $11.6 billion. Congress should ensure pressures, an ever‐increasing number of key resource properties that at least $900 million, consistent with the underlying will be lost if they are not purchased and conserved by the public. principle of the LWCF, are dedicated annually to long‐term Today, LWCF can meet only a small fraction of that urgent need. protection of our nation’s land and water resources. And each year, more and more of America’s irreplaceable wild lands, fish and wildlife habitats, scenic areas, historic sites, and Appendix A provides a listing of alternative funds and resources. neighborhood parks are developed, fragmented, and otherwise sacrificed because there is simply not enough LWCF money to go around. The Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition is a group of nonprofit organizations working together to support ample funding for the LWCF, the Forest Legacy Program and natural resource adaptation funding. We are pleased to present this report and the following recommendations:
The Land and Water Conservation Fund should be fully funded at $900 million annually ‐‐ the congressionally authorized level ‐ ‐ to ensure that critical natural, historical, ecological, cultural, and recreational resources will be protected around the nation. This is necessary to preserve and enhance the integrity of our national parks, national wildlife refuges, national forests, Bureau of Land Management lands, and other federal areas, as well as the vast network of state, county, and neighborhood parks serving close‐to‐home open space and public recreation needs. In addition, investments should be made immediately to address acquisition management needs at the four federal land management agencies, with particular attention to securing additional staff with expertise necessary to implement a strategic land acquisition program.”
18 State of New Mexico
New Mexico’s Recreation Providers Local Government (Counties/Municipalities/Public Schools) Of New Mexico’s 121,412 square miles, 42 percent, or 52,207 While many New Mexicans travel to enjoy the vast opportunities of square miles, is public land. These public lands are managed by the public lands on the weekends, it is local government which various federal, state, tribal, and local government entities provides most New Mexicans with daily accessible outdoor responsible for providing for both the outdoor recreation needs of recreation opportunities in the form of parks, fields, courts, pools, the state’s 1.8 million residents as well as for the protection and picnic areas, playgrounds, and trails. preservation of land for future generations. National Park Service New Mexico State Parks The National Park Service (NPS) manages fourteen sites totaling With thirty‐four parks distributed throughout the state’s regions, 391,031 acres including visitor centers and trails to historic, cultural, the New Mexico State Parks Division manages over 117,000 acres and natural and scenic sites which were visited by over 1.5 million not including water surface area in seventeen reservoirs. people in 2009.
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Bureau of Land Management NM Department of Game and Fish manages 56 areas that provide The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages more than 12 primarily for fishing and hunting although many include camping, million acres, of which 145,525 acres are wilderness, most of which picnicking areas, trails and allow wildlife viewing. is open to outdoor recreation activities including backpacking, hiking, biking, whitewater boating, fishing, caving, off‐road
vehicle driving, picnicking, wildlife viewing, and cultural site touring. New Mexico State Land Office
The New Mexico State Land Office manages some 22 million acres. Hunting, hiking, and horseback riding is permitted by permit on U.S. Forest Service publicly accessible and noncommercial land. The U.S. National Forest (USFS) manages over nine million acres of New Mexico’s most ecologically diverse lands ranging in elevation
from 4,000 to over 13,000 feet. Indian Tribe, Nation, and Pueblo Lands
New Mexico’s 22 Indian tribes, nations, and pueblos account for about 11 percent of New Mexico’s land area. These sovereign U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service entities have long provided visitors the opportunity to learn about The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages five National Wildlife their unique and special cultures through outdoor events such as Refuges (NWR) that are open for wildlife viewing as well as two feast days, arts and crafts shows, and tours as well as golf, skiing, national fish hatcheries, and an additional two NWR’s that are and rodeos. currently closed or only open occasionally.
New Mexico Transportation Department U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The Department promotes alternative non‐motorized The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages seven dams in New transportation and multi‐use trails, and the Scenic Byways and Back Mexico of which five include recreation areas. Country.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 19
Bureau of Reclamation Eight of the Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs recreation areas are managed by the New Mexico State Parks including: Brantley, Caballo, Heron, Leasburg Dam, Percha Dam, Sumner, El Vado, and Elephant Butte. Avalon Reservoir is managed by the Carlsbad Irrigation District.
20 State of New Mexico
Importance and Relevance of Outdoor Recreation The obesity epidemic and healthy aging are critical issues facing New Mexicans. In addition, it appears that projects that are “close State of New Mexico Health and Obesity Trends ‐ The Land to home” may have the greatest statewide appeal. Therefore, and Water Conservation Fund and Public Health smaller local projects, trail connections, fishing ponds and river access, restrooms, trailheads, and looped park trails may provide
the largest community reach and provide additional opportunities We are continuously reminded of the costs associated with for healthy and active lifestyles. Nature deficit disorder and obesity as more and more children are being diagnosed, in part connecting children to nature are critical issues facing New because of a sedentary lifestyle. Hypertension or high blood Mexicans. pressure, kidney disease, heart disease, and now liver disease are on the rise for children, some as young as age 12. The facts below The Center for Disease Control reported that New Mexico had a 24 tell the story about our children, their health and the outdoors: percent obesity rate for adults in 2007. Obesity is defined as having
a body mass index of greater than or equal to 30 percent of total • The percentage of obese youths has tripled to nearly 15% since body weight. Further, the United Health Foundation has ranked the 1960s. The number of children and adolescents now New Mexico 29th in its 2007 State Health Rankings. This is up nine considered overweight or obese has reached 17 million. Six out of rankings from 2006. every ten overweight children already have at least one risk factor for heart disease. The State’s strengths include: • Between 1981 and 1997, the amount of time that American Strong per capita public health funding. children ages six to eight actively played decreased by 25%, or Low levels of air pollution. almost four hours per week. Low rates of cancer deaths and cardiovascular deaths. • The freedom to explore and improvise play has been reduced Some of the challenges the State faces include: dramatically. The area in which children are free to roam has shrunk by 89% in 20 years. High rate of uninsured population. Low high school graduation rate. An active lifestyle, along with other factors, can help to reverse this High violent crime rate. trend we see growing out of control. However, if we expect people to adjust their lifestyles, they will need clean, safe places to go According to the NM Department of Health’s, The State of Health outdoors. The LWCF can help provide those areas. Whether they are in New Mexico 2009, Weight Status, “In 2007, significantly fewer water parks, tennis courts, swimming pools, winter sledding areas high school students in New Mexico were obese (10.9%) than and playgrounds, or hiking, snow shoe and biking trails in our nationally (13.0%). In addition, fewer New Mexico high school national parks and forests, they are an essential component of a students were overweight (13.5%) than high school students healthy lifestyle. Federal and stateside LWCF projects are making nationally (15.8%). [However], This difference is driven mainly by critical contributions toward addressing our nation’s growing public lower rates among non‐Hispanic White students in New Mexico, health concerns. who experience the lowest rate of weight problems (combined obesity and overweight: 18.6%), followed by Hispanic (26.0%) and American Indian students (32.4%).
2010 – 2014 SCORP 21
Over 60% of New Mexican adults were overweight or obese (35.7% In an article dated June 22, 2009, United Press International, (UPI) and 25.1%, respectively) compared with over 62% nationally (36.6% indicates that according to a survey, “69 percent of U.S. children in overweight and 26.3% obese) in 2007. Over the last decade, the the lowest income bracket don't have access to a community rates of overweight and obesity have increased across the nation as playground.” 5 The survey commissioned by KaBOOM!, a national well as in New Mexico. Among subpopulations, American Indian nonprofit dedicated to bringing play back into the lives of children, (32.8%) and Hispanic (30.0%) adults in the state experience was conducted by Harris Interactive between March 31, and April 7, significantly higher obesity rates than non‐Hispanic White (20.5%).” 2009, and included 1,677 parents with children between the ages of 2‐12. The survey also found: Economic Impact of Obesity Kids spend less than an hour per day [on average] engaged “An estimated $324 million is spent in New Mexico annually on in unstructured play outdoors. medical expenditures that are attributable to obesity in adults, with Fifty‐nine percent (59%) of parents report that their $52 million spent within the Medicare population and $84 million in children don't have access to a community playground. the Medicaid population. The economic burden of obesity suggests Ninety‐six percent (96%) of parents said playing outside was that environmental and policy changes that reduce barriers to being critical to keep kids physically fit. physically active and choosing healthful foods and beverages are Only percent (17%) thought children played enough required in communities and at schools and work sites, and in the outside. 2 food industry and health care systems throughout the state.” Ninety‐two percent (92%) of parents said children today spend less time playing outside than they did when they According to the American Academy of Pediatrics’ June 6, 2009 were children. Policy Statement, “32 percent of American children are [estimated to be] overweight, and physical inactivity contributes to the high 3 It is evident that the socio‐economic benefits of outdoor prevalence of overweight.” The Committee on Environmental recreation spaces and experiences far outweigh the public’s Health cites park and recreation agencies to be important in investment. In fact, an active life connected to nature is not only a providing opportunities for parks, playgrounds, open space and right of human existence, it is a requirement for sustained public trails within the community “to achieve the recommended 60 4 and environmental health, and therefore, parks and outdoor minutes of daily physical activity.” spaces held in public trust are essential services. Now more than ever, the vitality of New Mexico’s residents and visitors, and the economic health of the state, rests in our commitment to sustaining these public spaces and providing vital life‐enhancing experiences.
2 The State of Health in New Mexico 2009, New Mexico Department of Health 3 PEDIATRICS Vol. 123 No. 6 June 2009, pp. 1591‐1598 (doi:10.1542/peds.2009‐0750); The 5 Built Environment: Designing Communities to Promote Physical Activity in Children Most U.S. kids have no playground access, June 22, 2009 (web article) http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/pediatrics;123/6/1591?rss=1. http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/06/22/Most‐US‐kids‐have‐no‐playground‐ 4 Ibid. access/UPI‐75741245728834/.
22 State of New Mexico
Economic Impact of Outdoor Recreation Department of Game and Fish Economic Contributions A 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife‐Associated Economic Impact of State Parks and Outdoor Recreation Recreation study indicated that 40 percent of New Mexico’s state Visitors to the New Mexico State Parks have been steadily residents participate in wildlife‐associated recreation, both inside 6 increasing since 2005. and outside New Mexico. Forty percent of New Mexico’s state residents participate in wildlife‐associated recreation, both inside and outside New In the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) Mexico. 2006/2007 annual report, Director Bruce Thompson states, “nearly Outdoor recreation supports 47,000 jobs across New 100,000 big game and 246,000 fishing licenses were sold. These licenses provided more than 1.5 million days afield for those Mexico and generates: 7 o $184 million in annual New Mexico state tax hunters and anglers.” revenue. o $3.8 billion in annually to New Mexico’s economy. Off‐Highway Vehicle (OHV) Economic Contributions o $184 million in annual New Mexico state tax The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) data revenue. indicates that the state is comprised of 54 percent public lands, and 8 The outdoor recreation industry: they are administered for multiple use. With hundreds of miles of o Produces $2.75 billion annually in retail sales and backcountry trails, off‐highway vehicle (OHV) use is permitted when services across New Mexico – accounting for 4.6% it is done in a responsible and safe manner. According to their of gross state product. website, “over the past few decades, the availability, and capability o Provides sustainable growth in rural communities. of OHVs have increased tremendously. More Americans are enjoying access and recreational opportunities on their national Except for those with direct economic interests, people often fail to forests and grasslands, in keeping with the US Forest Service's consider the importance that outdoor recreation holds for local multiple use mandates.” economies. In parts of New Mexico, outdoor recreation and tourism have long played an important economic development role. Many On July 1, 2009, the New Mexico OHV program officially of New Mexico’s smaller and more rural communities are “gateway transitioned from the Tourism Department to the Department of communities” that are located near an access point to an outdoor Game & Fish (DG&F). DG&F has resurrected the "b4uride.com" recreation site such as the national forest, a reservoir, ski area or website, and it has been populated with up‐to‐date information on historic site and usually derive a good measure of their community the state's OHV regulations, registrations, and safety requirements. income from supporting outdoor recreation activities through lodger’s taxes, gross receipts taxes, and employment in businesses that sell supplies or provide hospitality services. 6 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife‐Associated Recreation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, http://library.fws.gov/pubs/nat_survey2006_final.pdf. 7 http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/publications/documents/annual_ report/ 07AnnualReportWEB.pdf. 8 http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/ohv/ohv.html.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 23
While not a major industry in the state, New Mexico is host to nine dedicated OHV areas located in the northwest, southwest, and southeast part of the state. The major operator for the OHV areas is the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
However, as the US Forest Service in New Mexico begins the process of implementing the new Travel Management Rules in the National Forest more opportunities for OHV areas may develop.”9 The increase in OHV use also affects soil, water, wildlife habitat, and other recreational visitors. To properly manage the affects of OHVs, the USDA Forest Service announced a travel management program that will consider proposed regulations governing OHVs and other motor vehicle use on national forests and grasslands.
9 http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/ohv/ohv.html.
24 State of New Mexico
National Recreation Economic Trends Boating Across the United States Recreational boating continued to contribute significantly 10 Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System to the U.S. economy, generating $33.6 billion in sales and According to this study published in 2009 by The Trust for Public services during 2008, a decrease of 10 percent from 2007. Land and Center for City Park Excellence, seven attributes of city In response to a weakened economy, the number of new park systems that provide economic value ‐‐ property value, boats sold during 2008 decreased 16 percent to 704,820 tourism, direct use, health, community cohesion, clean water, and units. clean air ‐‐ can be quantified and measured. “Two of these factors Adult participation in recreational boating increased six provide a city with direct income to its treasury. The first factor is percent to an estimated 70.1 million in 2008, from 66.4 increased property tax from the increase in property value because million in 2007. This marks the third consecutive year of of the proximity to parks.” The study says, “the second is increased participation growth since the 15‐year low in 2005. sales tax on spending by tourists who visit primarily because of the While some national trends indicate that boating may be city’s parks.” declining, according to the National Marine Manufacturers Association, the proportion of the American adult “Three other factors provide city residents direct savings. By far, the population who went boating in 2008 increased to 30.5 largest amount stems from residents’ use of the city’s free parkland percent from 29.2 percent in 2007. and free (or low‐cost) recreation opportunities.” The introduction explains that the “second is the health benefit ‐‐ savings in medical Golfing as an Industry costs ‐‐ due to the beneficial aspects of exercise in the parks. The GOLF 20/20, is an initiative of the World Golf Foundation (WGF). third is the community cohesion benefit of people banding together WGF is a nonprofit organization that unites the golf industry in to save and improve their neighborhood parks. This “know‐your‐ support of programs that promote, enhance the growth of, and neighbor” social capital helps ward off antisocial problems that provide access to the game of golf worldwide. Golf 20/20 published would otherwise cost the city more in police and fire protection, its first national report in 2002, demonstrating thate in th year prisons, counseling, and rehabilitation.” 2000, golf was a $62 billion industry, which is bigger than the motion picture and recording industries combined. A follow‐up “The last two factors provide environmental savings. The larger report in 2007 confirmed that golf had grown to become a $76 involves water pollution reduction ‐‐ the retention of rainfall by the billion industry, with a total impact of $195 billion on the U.S. park system’s trees, bushes, and soil, thus cutting the cost of economy in 2005.11 treating stormwater. The other concerns air pollution ‐‐ the fact that Golfing led to approximately two million jobs with wages park trees and shrubs absorb a variety of air pollutants.” totaling $61 billion in 2005.
10 Center for City Park Excellence and The Trust for Public Land, Peter Harnik, March 2009, 11 www.tpl.org/ccpe. http://www.golf2020.com/economicresearch.aspx..
2010 – 2014 SCORP 25
Equestrian Economics Figure 1: NM State Park Attendance 2005 thru 2009 The latest statistics from the American Horse Council’s 2005 economic study done by Deloitte Consulting, LLP indicate: 4,800,000 4,603,901 4,519,423 There are 9.2 million horses in the United States. 4,600,000 4.6 million Americans are involved in the industry as horse owners, service providers, employees, and volunteers. Tens 4,400,000 of millions more participate as spectators. 4,147,015 4,157,169 4,200,000 Two million people own horses. 4,031,806 The horse industry has a direct economic effect on the U.S. 4,000,000 of $39 billion annually. The industry has a $102 billion impact on the U.S. economy 3,800,000 when the multiplier effect of spending by industry suppliers 3,600,000 and employees is taken into account. Including off‐site 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 spending of spectators would result in an even higher figure. Utah’s national parks and monuments have seen an increase in The industry directly provides 460,000 full‐time equivalent 13 (FTE) jobs.12 visitation with the downturn in the economy. More locals appear to be spending less on travel and staying home to vacation. In 2008, Americans are Staying Closer to Home the 13 national parks in Utah reported 8.8 million recreational visits, up by about a quarter‐million visits over 2007, and more than a half‐ Did you know that families are seeking closer to home Outdoor million visits over 2006. Recreation opportunities? According to NM Sate Parks data, some
70 percent of New Mexicans live within 40 miles of a State Park. In California, while threatened with closures, State Parks staff are New Mexico has 34 diverse State Parks to explore, including cool seeing a pattern of more residents staying local than ever before.14 lakes, mountain forests, canyons, desert beauty, and fascinating The dwindling economy and soaring gas prices are credited with the historical sites – even dinosaur tracks. New Mexico State Parks offer “staycation” or “daycation” effect. According to an article about the family‐friendly settings, endless recreational opportunities, and economic impact of the State’s parks the researcher states that, hundreds of special events and educational programs each year. In “people are continuing to visit state parks, even when travel costs 2008, the state parks attracted 4.6 million visitors (Figure 1), which were very high.... there is a lot of indication that people are represented an increase over previous years. choosing parks because they’re near to home.” 15
13 Bad economy can’t beat nature, Lee Davidson, Deseret News, February 23, 2009. 14 Study: Parks bring billions to state, millions to local communities, June 14, 2009 (web article) http://lakeconews.com/content/view/9087/764/. 15 SAC State study claims state parks pay for themselves, June 9, 2009 (web article) 12 http://www.horsecouncil.org/nationaleconomics.php. http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=y1e14b6g2fh7yt.
26 State of New Mexico
In New Mexico and the Nation Figure 2 illustrates New Mexicans’ participation in active outdoor 16 According to the Outdoor Industry Foundation (OIF), more than recreation activities. three out of every four Americans participate in active outdoor recreation each year. “Active” outdoor recreation (which includes New Mexico’s Key Statistics and Outdoor Recreation Trends bicycling, camping, fishing, hunting, paddling sports, snow sports, New Mexico’s culturally rich and diverse population is wildlife viewing, trail‐running, hiking, and climbing) contributes approximately two million. While the median state income is over $730 billion annually to the U.S. economy. $41,500 annually, over 30 percent earn below $25,000 a year, with approximately 43 percent earning less than $35,000. It is estimated Figure 2: New Mexico’s Active Outdoor Recreation that almost 18 percent of the population falls below the poverty Participation line, almost five percent more than the nation.
Almost ten percent are American Indian or Alaska Native living on or off a reservation, pueblo, or on tribal land, as compared with the United States average of one percent. Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin represent over 44 percent of the population versus 15 percent for the nation.
Roughly seven percent of the residents are under five years of age, while over 25 percent are under 18 years old. Almost 13 percent are 65 years and older. This age distribution is typical when compared to the United States average.
New Mexico’s land area ranks fifth largest in the nation, behind Alaska, Texas, California, and Montana with well over 121,000 square miles.17 In the 2000 Census, this translated to 15 persons per square mile as compared with the United States average of almost 80 persons per square mile. The state ranks 45th out of 50 states for population density, ahead of South and North Dakota (respectively), Montana, Wyoming, and finally Alaska.18
16 http://www.outdoorfoundation.org/pdf/ResearchRecreationEconomy StateMexico.pdf. 17 http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/area.shtml. 18 http://www.census.gov/Press‐Release/state02.prn.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 27
Visitors to the New Mexico National Parks has increased from 2005‐ 2008, hovering around 1.62 ‐1.65 million. 19 However, this is a significant and steady decrease since a high in 1997 of 2.25 million visits.
In 2008, New Mexico State Parks saw its fourth highest year in visitation since a high in 1997 of 5.20 million, boasting almost 4.62 million visits.20 State Monument visits were down in 2007 at just over 76,000 versus over 80,000 in 2006.21
Appendix B provides information related to Outdoor Recreation Industry Trends.
19 Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of New Mexico, http://www.edd.state.nm.us/images/uploads/economy/nmTourismSelectedIndicators.pdf. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid.
28 State of New Mexico
New Mexico’s SCORP Managing Agencies The allocation of funds under the LWCF may be conducted through a statewide application process. Contained within the application The following agencies play a role in administering the SCORP. are a number of criteria to guide the allocation of funds, including
compliance with the SCORP. A project applicant is required by these National Park Service criteria to demonstrate a link between the proposed project and the New Mexico receives LWCF funds from the Department of the analysis of New Mexico’s outdoor recreation supply, demand, and Interior managed through the National Parks Service, which is the needs contained in the SCORP. In particular, the applicant’s project corresponding federal agency that reviews the statewide plan. Upon should fit the priorities expressed in the public involvement process. approval, the NPS authorizes the release of funds to the State if funds are available. Who are the Partners in the SCORP?
New Mexico State Parks Counties and Municipalities. The State Parks Division of the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and State Parks. Natural Resources Department (NMEMNRD) is the state agency Federal Land Managers. acting as liaison with the federal government for the purposes of Sovereign Nations. preparing the SCORP. The New Mexico State Parks Division Outdoor Recreation providers. commissions and oversees the development of the statewide plan Nonprofit organizations partnering with the above. and, when completed and approved, forwards it to the National Health organizations partnering with the above. Park Service. Following approval, the State Parks Division is For profit businesses partnering with the above. responsible for the oversight, management, and allocation of the Most importantly − the public participants in outdoor LWCF monies through a request for proposal grant process. recreation.
Role of SCORP in Allocating Funds State Parks administers the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Federal Grant Program. Funds are provided through the U.S. Department of Interior’s National Park Service. The LWCF Program is a 50 percent federal and 50 percent local matching grant program.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 29
State‐wide Demographics Using Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI Business Solutions) and the U.S. Census, the following data was analyzed: This section of the SCORP provides an analysis of New Mexico Population demographics in an effort to identify behavioral trends, implications, and recommendations for outdoor recreation Household Income providers and planners. Demographic profiles were broken down by Median Age five planning service areas, Central, Northwest, Northeast, Age Distribution Southwest, and Southeast as identified in the map in, Figure 3. Ethnicity
Figure 3: New Mexico SCORP Service Areas New Mexico’s 2008 estimated population was 2,029,633. By the year 2013, the State’s population is projected to be 2,185,141, an increase of over 7.5 percent. The population by service area identifies the Central Service Area of the state as having the highest population (638,652) and the Northeast Service Area as having the lowest population (118,848) as shown Figure 4.
The State is comprised of 33 counties with a wide range of median household income levels, from the mid $20,000’s to over $100,000. Median age and age distribution varies with a possible correlation to those living in urban areas and those living in rural areas. Age distribution, as shown in Table 2, suggests that the 25‐34 age cohort is attracted to the urban area. Part of New Mexico’s uniqueness is its cultural make up with a significant representation of Hispanics and American Indians. Part of this includes a large Navajo Nation reservation, Jicarilla and Mescalero Apache reservations, and nineteen Pueblo, Ute, and Zuni tribes.
Table 2, on the following page, outlines the median age, median household income, and racial composition by service area. When creating programs and services for communities, it is important to recognize that many of them are culturally rich and diverse. Festivals, events, leisure time in the park, and partnerships are all trends affecting the offering of culturally diverse programs. A closer look at the service area demographics follows.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 31
Figure 4: 2008 New Mexico Service Area Population Table 2: 2008 New Mexico Service Area Demographics Estimates Service Area Median Median Racial Composition Age Household Income Northwest Northeast Central Northwest 35.1 49,324 White 55.9% Southeast Southwest Black or African American .9% Southwest, 308,209 American Indian Alone 24.8 %
Southeast, 327,289 Northwest , 636,635 Asian/Pacific Islander .9 % Some other race alone 14.0 % Two or more races 3.5% Hispanic Origin* 35.6% Northeast, 118,848 Diversity Index 79.7 Central, 638,652 Source: Northeast 40.3 33,866 White 66.2% Black or African American .8% ESRI Business Information Solutions American Indian Alone 3.1% Asian/Pacific Islander .6 % Some other race alone 25.4 % Two or more races 3.9% Hispanic Origin* 60.0% Diversity Index 77.1 Central 35.9 44,678 White 69.0% Black or African American 2.9% American Indian Alone 4.5% Asian/Pacific Islander 2.4% Some other race alone 16.7% Two or more races 4.4% Hispanic Origin* 44.2% Diversity Index 75.7 Southwest 33.6 35,480 White 69.4% Black or African American 1.3% American Indian Alone 2.1% Asian/Pacific Islander .8 % Some other race alone 22.8 % Two or more races 3.6% Hispanic Origin* 60.3% Diversity Index 74.9 Southeast 35.6 37,523 White 71.5% Black or African American 3.5% American Indian Alone 2.3% Asian/Pacific Islander 1.1% Some other race alone 18.3% Two or more races 3.4% Hispanic Origin* 38.5% Diversity Index 73.0 *Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. The Diversity Index measures the probability that two people from the same area will be from different race/ethnic groups. Source: ESRI Business Solutions, Inc.
32 State of New Mexico
Central Service Area Age Distribution Comparisons Bernalillo County Age distribution in the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County Bernalillo County serves as the hub for large urban servcies in New are very similar. Both are representative of the big picture in New Mexico. It is considered the Central Service Area of the State. In Mexico. As shown in Figure 6, the State of New Mexico estimates 2008, 31.4 percent of the State’s population resided in Bernalillo suggest fewer residents between the ages of 25‐44 live in the rural County. The demographic anaylsis for this service area is more areas, while urban areas attract this age group. The median age for detailed than the following four service areas due to its uniqueness residents in the City of Albuquerque is 35.7 years, in Bernalillo as a hub as well as its size. County it is 35.9, and the State median is 35.5. Programs and services should reflect trends for these age cohorts. To help identify Population Distribution Comparison recreation activities see Appendix C for Recreation Age Trends and Figure 5 shows population comparisons for the City of Albuquerque, Population Characteristics. Bernalillo County, and the State of Mexico. During identified years, 2000, 2008, and 2013, 80 percent of the County population lives or Figure 6: 2008 Age Distributions will elive in th City of Albuquerque. City of Albuquerque Bernalillo County State of New Mexico Figure 5: Projected Population Change 2000‐2013 16.0% 14.0% City of Albuquerque Bernalillo County State of New Mexico 12.0% 10.0% 2,500,000 2,185,141 8.0% 1,819,046 2,029,633 6.0% 2,000,000 4.0% 2.0% 1,500,000 556,678 638,652 698,959 0.0% 1,000,000 Under 55‐14 15‐24 25‐34 35‐44 45‐54 55‐64 65 + 564,488 Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions 448,607 516,636 500,000
0
2000 2008 2013 Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions
2010 – 2014 SCORP 33
Household Income Table 3: Race Comparisons for 2008 In 2008, the estimated median household income for Albuquerque Race City of Bernalillo State of New was $52,282. Similarly, in Bernalillo County it was $52,609, while Albuquerque County Mexico the State median household income was estimated at only $44,678. White Alone 69.5% 69.0% 65.2% Figure 7 shows income distribution comparisons. It is of note that household income distributions for the City of Albuquerque are African American Alone 3.2% 2.9% 2.0% closer to Bernalillo County, than to the State. Differentiation American Indian Alone 4.3% 4.5% 10.1% primarily occurs in the lower income cohorts, indicating that more Asian Alone or Pacific 2.7% 2.4% 1.4% residents in the State as well as in rural areas earn under $50,000, Islander Alone than in the Central Service Area. Some Other Race Alone 15.7% 16.7% 17.5%
Figure 7: Household Income Two or More Races 4.5% 4.4% 3.8% Hispanic/Latino Origin (Any City of Albuquerque Bernalillo County State of New Mexico 42.6% 44.2% 43.9% 25.0% Race)*
20.0% Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions
15.0% *Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. This number
10.0% reflects the percentage of the total population. Education 5.0%
0.0% Education attainment data is similar to previous category < $15,000 $15,000‐ $25,000‐ $35,000‐ $50,000‐ $75,000‐ $100,000‐$150,000‐$200,000+ comparisons. Both the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County 24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 $199,999 Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions represent similar percentages.
Race/Ethnicity Statistics gathered from ESRI Business Solutions provides an analysis of ethnicity in the Central Service Area of New Mexico. The most compelling statistic relating to race comparsions as shown in Table 3 is the greater number of American Indians in rural parts of the State. Estimates in 2008 signify that there are over five percent more American Indians outside of the urban environment of Bernilillo County. This is represented by the fact that one of the nineteen Pueblo Indian communities is located in this area. The Isleta Pueblo straddles both Bernalillo and Valencia County. Also shown is that White is the race with the largest population for all three comparative areas.
34 State of New Mexico
Table 4 suggests that higher levels of education are attained by Northwest Service Area those living in urban environments. In rural New Mexico there are Cibola, McKinley, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, San Juan, Santa Fe, and fewer residents with Bachelor’s degrees, or higher. Valencia Counties
Table 4: Educational Attainment – 25 Years and Older (2008) The Northwest Service Area consists of seven counties. The racial Level of Education City of Bernalillo State of New composition, as previously shown in Table 2, is the most diverse of Attained Albuquerque County Mexico all service areas. The American Indian ethnic group is higher here Less than 9th Grade 4.9% 5.4% 7.3% than anywhere else in New Mexico.e Th Navajo Nation reservation 9th‐12th Grade, No overlaps portions of San Juan and McKinley counties, with a chapter 7.8% 8.4% 10.5% Diploma in Cibola County. Other Native American populations include the Ute in San Juan County and Jicarilla Apache in Rio Arriba and High School Graduate 25.2% 25.8% 27.8% Sandoval Counties. In addition, 16 of the 19 Pueblo Indian Some College, No 22.7% 22.1% 21.8% communities are located in this area. Acoma, Laguna and Zuni Diploma Pueblos in Cibola County; Cochiti, Jemez, Sandia, San Felipe, San Associate Degree 6.7% 6.6% 6.9% Ysidro, Santa Ana, Santo Domingo and Zia Pueblos in Sandoval Bachelor’s Degree 18.6% 17.8% 14.1% County; Nambe, Pojoaque, San Ildefonso, Tesuque Pueblos in Santa Fe County, Ohkay Owingeh and Santa Clara Pueblos in Rio Arriba Master’s/Prof/Doctorate 14.1% 13.9% 10.6% County, and Taos and Picuris Pueblos in Taos County. Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions As shown in Table 5, the estimated 2008 total population in the Central Service Area Demographics Summary Northwest Service area was 635,635. Santa Fe County ranks the The estimated 2008 population in Bernalillo County is highest with a population of 146,632, followed by San Juan 638,652. The 2013 projected population is 689,959, an (129,454) and Sandoval (121,555) counties. The county with the increase of over eight percent. lowest population is Cibola with 28,151 residents. The median Bernalillo County residents’ median age is 35.9 years, household income ranges from $31,322 in McKinley County to almost the same as the City (35.7) and the State (35.5). $61,168 in Sandoval County. Santa Fe County shows the next The median household income for Bernalillo County is highest median household income of $57,748. higher than both the City of Albuquerque and the State of New Mexico. The ethnic make‐up for the central New Mexico is diverse,
similar to the State.
Education attainment for central New Mexico is higher than in rural parts of the State.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 35
Table 5: Northwest Service Area County Comparison Figure 8: Northwest Service Area 2008 Age Distribution County Estimated Median Median Household Population Age Income 16.0% Northwest State of New Mexico
Cibola 28,151 33.8 $ 34.032 14.0%
Los Alamos 19,939 43.4 $104,917 12.0%
McKinley 76,322 27.6 $ 31,322 10.0% Rio Arriba 41,501 35.7 $ 36,561 8.0%
Sandoval 121, 555 36.1 $ 61,168 6.0% San Juan 129,454 31.7 $ 43,513 4.0% Santa Fe 146,632 39.9 $ 57.748 Valencia 73,081 35.2 $ 42,581 2.0% 2008 ESRI Business Information Solutions ‐ Estimates 0.0% Under 55‐14 15‐24 25 ‐34 35 ‐44 45 ‐54 55 ‐64 65 +
The median age in the Northwest Service Area spans 10 years. In McKinley County, the median age is 27.6 years, while in Santa Fe County it is 39.9. See Figure 8 for detailed age distributions in the Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions Northwest Service Area. Outdoor recreation trends vary as both the Millennials (represented by those between the ages of 10‐28 years, Northeast Service Area defined as born between the years 1981‐1999) and Generation Xers Colfax, Guadalupe, Harding, Mora, Quay, San Miguel, Taos, (represented by those between the ages of 29‐44 years, defined as Torrance, and Union Counties born between the years 1965‐1980) are represented here. The age trends section of this document further discusses popular activities Nine counties make up the Northeast Service Area. While there are for these generations. more counties in this service area, the total population is 118,949 making it the least populated service area in New Mexico. The two counties with the highest population are Taos County (32,168) and “NM has much to offer, great outdoor San Miguel (29,625). Both are almost double the population of the facilities – more than the public is aware remaining seven counties. Harding County has the lowest of. More publicity on such facilities as population, with a mere 824 residents. Median household income is lowest in Guadalupe County ($28,020) and highest in Colfax County state parks is needed.” ($37,749). The majority of the countiesd represente in this service area show median household income ranging from $28,000‐ $33,500.
36 State of New Mexico
Table 2 indicates that there is a greater number of people of Hispanic origin and fewer American Indians. Only two of the Figure 9: Northeast 2008 Age Distribution nineteen Pueblo Indian communities are located in this area, the Northeast State of New Mexico Taos and Picuris Pueblos in Taos County. 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% Table 6 summarizes the Northeast Service Area demographics. 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% Table 6: Northeast Service Area County Comparison 6.0% County 2008 Estimated Median Median Household 4.0% Population Age Income 2.0% Colfax 14,570 44.2 $37,749 0.0% Under 55‐14 15‐24 25‐34 35‐44 45‐54 55‐64 65 + Guadalupe 4,714 38.7 $28,020 Harding 824 50.0 $31,124 Mora 5,249 42.3 $28,250 Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions Quay 9,470 44.5 $29,224 San Miguel 29,625 36.4 $33,786 Southwest Service Area Taos 32,168 42.7 $33,477 Catron, Doña Ana, Grant, Hidalgo, Luna, Sierra, and Socorro Torrance 18,248 36.0 $37,664 Counties Union 3,980 41.6 $33,258 2008 ESRI Estimates The Southwest, representing seven counties, is the second lowest populated area in New Mexico. However, it almost triples the The median age in this service area shows Harding County as an population of the Northeast Service Area. This service area’s 2008 older community when compared to other counties. Harding’s estimated population was 308,209. Doña Ana County represents median age is 50 years while other counties median age ranges over 67 percent of the Southwest Service Area population. The from 36‐44. Age distribution in the Northeast Service Area when counties with the lowest population are Catron (3,760) and Hidalgo compared to the State shows a greater number of “Baby Boomers” (5,473). As with the State of New Mexico, the diversity in this (represented by those between the ages of 45‐63 years, and defined service area is vast, and as with the Northeast Service Area, there is as born between the years 1946‐1964) and “Matures” (those over a higher amount of people of Hispanic origin than in the other 65 years). See Figure 9 for more a more detailed comparison. service areas. One of the smallest of the Navajo Nation Chapters, the Alamo Band, is located in this area within Socorro County. The Southwest’s median household income is $35,480. Doña Ana “It is important that children learn about nature, County ranks highest in median household income, $38,299, wildlife and animal habitats. More school field followed by Grant County with a median household income of trips starting at elementary school may help give $36,707. This service area has the second lowest median household our children a lifelong appreciation of nature.” income behind the Northeast ($33,866). Table 7 summarizes the Southwest Service Area demographics.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 37
Table 7: Southwest Service Area County Comparison Southeast Service Area County Estimated Median Age Median Household Chaves, Curry, De Baca, Eddy, Lea, Lincoln, Otero, and Roosevelt Population Income Counties Catron 3,760 53.3 $28,826 Doña Ana 208,542 31.1 $38,299 There are eight counties that make up the Southeast Service Area. Grant 31,025 40.2 $36,707 Population ranges from 2,237 in De Baca County to 65,096 in Otero Hidalgo 5,473 35.4 $29,791 County. The total population for this service area is 327,289, just Luna 27,329 37.7 $25,431 over 19,000 more than the Southwest Service Area. This area is Sierra 13,364 51.7 $29,243 ranked in the middle of all five areas. Median household income is Socorro 18,078 33.0 $29,839 lowest in De Baca County ($29,959) and highest in Lincoln County 2008 ESRI Estimates ($42,089). As shown in Table 2, there is a higher percentage of white residents than in the other four service areas. Diversity is The overall median age for this service area is 33.6 years. However, lower in the Southeast Service Area. Table 8 details the among counties there is a 22‐year age span between median ages. demographics of this service area. The only Native American Catron County’s median age is 53.3 years. It is the oldest in the presence in this area is the Mescalero Apache Tribe, with 4,000 State, while Doña Ana County, a more urban area, has a median age members, located in Otero County. of 31.1 years. With such a wide variety of ages, recreation planners will have to provide a wide array of offerings to provide for and Table 8: Southeast Service Area Demographics attract different generations. County Estimated Median Median Household Population Age Income Figure 10 provides more detail on the Southwest Service Area’s age Chaves 62,450 36.0 $35,314 distribution as compared to the State. Curry 46,648 31.8 $37,042 De Baca 2,237 46.1 $29,959 Figure18.00% 10: Southwest Service Area 2008 Age Distribution Eddy 52,215 37.8 $39,683 16.00% Southwest State of New Mexico Lea 57,869 33.9 $36,909 14.00% Lincoln 22,049 47.0 $42,089 12.00% Otero 65,096 35.1 $38,771 10.00% Roosevelt 18,725 30.4 $33,083 8.00% 2008 ESRI Estimates 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% Under 55‐14 15‐24 25 ‐34 35 ‐44 45 ‐54 55 ‐64 65 + 0.00%
Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions
38 State of New Mexico
The overall median age for the Southeast Service Area is 35.6 years. Lincoln County’s median age is 47, while Roosevelt represents the County with the youngest median age, 30.4 years. Planning recreational programs for this age range will be similar to the Northwest. Millenials (10‐28 years) and Generation Xers (29‐44 years) are represented here.
Figure 11 provides more detail on the Southeast Service Area’s age distribution as compared to the State.
Figure 11: Southeast Service Area 2008 Age Distribution 1 6.00% Southeast State of New Mexico 1 4.00%
1 2.00% 1 0.00%8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00% Under 55‐14 15‐ 24 25 ‐34 35 ‐44 45 ‐54 55 ‐64 65 + Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions
2010 – 2014 SCORP 39
Public Outreach Stakeholder testimonial:
Public Meetings and Focus Groups “There is a whole array of experiences that are only learned A series of meetings were conducted to obtain public and through being outside in nature.” stakeholder input: April 27‐29, 2009 ‐‐ Northern Portion of the State o Farmington Participation Barriers o Las Vegas Low income and economic conditions prevent sports o Santa Fe participation. o Bernalillo County Equipment costs, depending on the outdoor recreation June 1‐5, 2009 ‐‐ Southern Portion of the State activity, such as camping gear, can be prohibitive. o Santa Rosa Public agencies often lack funds to acquire, develop, and o Roswell maintain more facilities and services. o Las Cruces Many communities and counties are unable to maintain or o Socorro update obsolescent playgrounds, swimming pools, and o Albuquerque sports complexes. Due to New Mexico’s rural nature, State Parks and National The following questions were discussed: Forests often function as regional parks in local areas of the What do you value about outdoor recreation in New Mexico? state. What is your vision for the future? Transportation to get to outdoor recreation programs and What are the barriers to service? services is prohibitive. Who are the private and nonprofit providers? Nature deficit disorder created by a technologically rooted What new things have you seen in outdoor parks and society and one or two working parent households with recreation lately? latch key children. In terms of outdoor recreation, what would be good for the Cultural needs for different ethnicities and races should be whole community? identified.
Lack of awareness of what is available and how to access Outdoor recreation resources and opportunities were extremely services. important to those that attended. The impact these amenities and services have on people’s quality of life, environmental issues, and healthy living make outdoor recreation an essential service to them. New Mexico boasts many diverse types of activities and environments. As a result, outdoor recreation services contribute greatly to the State’s economy.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 41
Community Survey Random Sample Survey Response Completed mail and online surveys received totaled 441 out of a net Statewide Outreach Efforts estimated 7,600 delivered (approximately five percent of surveys Four separate outreach efforts were used to conduct the mailed are returned "undeliverable" due to invalid addresses and/or community survey portion of the outdoor recreation needs residents who have moved and no longer reside at a particular assessment: address). This represents a response rate of approximately 5.8%, A statistically‐valid Random Sample Survey was mailed to with the sample of 441 responses having a margin of error of 8,000 statewide residents with a postage‐paid return approximately +/‐ 4.7 percentage points calculated for questions at 22 envelope addressed to the survey firm RRC Associates in 50% response . Also of note is that the resultant database is Boulder, CO with a password protected online web option. weighted by age, ethnicity, and service area of residence of A survey was mailed to the Land and Water Conservation respondent to ensure appropriate representation of state residents Fund (LWCF) agency database, targeting those who have across different demographic cohorts in the overall sample. received this type of Federal funding in New Mexico. An Open‐Link Web Survey was provided on the New Mexico LWCF Agency, Open‐link Web, and Sovereign Nations Survey State Parks website. Responses A Sovereign Nations outreach campaign was conducted and The mail and invitational web survey sent to 189 LWCF participating included 500 surveys proportioned by population to the agencies and organizations throughout the state yielded completion Navajo Nation agencies and chapters, Pueblos, and Apache of surveys from 19 agencies (or about 10%). tribes.
22 For the total sample size of 441, margin of error is +/‐ 4.7 percent calculated for questions at 50% response (if the response for a particular question is “50%”—the standard way to generalize margin of error is to state the larger margin, which occurs for responses at 50%). Note that the margin of error is different for every single question response on the survey depending on the resultant sample sizes, proportion of responses, and number of answer categories for each question. Comparison of differences in the data between various segments, therefore, should take into consideration these factors. As a general comment, it is sometimes more appropriate to focus attention on the general trends and patterns in the data rather than on the individual percentages.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 43
The open‐link version of the online questionnaire was made The service area analysis, included as a separate section of the Final available to all residents of New Mexico, so anyone could complete Survey Results report, also examined only the random survey the questionnaire if they did not receive one by invitation in the responses. Sample sizes at the service area level were much smaller mail. Along with coverage of the survey in the local media, the than at the aggregate state level, and as such, caution should be survey link was posted on the New Mexico State Parks Division exercised when interpreting these results. In any case, this website. An email notification of the open‐link survey was also segmentation of the results helped to further “explain” local distributed by REI, a retail outdoor recreational equipment and opinions and provided additional insight to outdoor recreation outfitter (to approximately 20,000 subscribers in New Mexico) and issues in the state. Data tables showing these segmentations by by the New Mexico chapter of The Wildlife Society (approximately service area are provided as an appendix section in the Final Survey 300 members). In total, 157 openb‐link we surveys were completed. Results document.
A key finding of the outreach efforts conducted was that there were The entire Final Survey Results document with appendices, intended no responses from the efforts to elicit input from the Sovereign to be a staff‐level document, was provided to the New Mexico State Nations. In the future, a different type of outreach effort clearly Parks Division as a stand‐alone document. The Final Survey Results demonstrating the benefits of participating in this statewide effort report without the appendices is included in this document as may yield some response. Appendix D.
Response Analysis Key Survey Findings Total responses received from all survey methodologies were 617, The following responses to key questions were used in the GRASP® representing a good response rate and generating an adequate Analysis, as detailed later in this report, to help formulate database for analysis. As the open‐link survey responders were recommendations to address identified gaps in service. “self‐selected” and not a part of the randomly selected sample of residents, results were kept separate from the mail and invitation If you do not participate in outdoor recreation, why not? Or if you web versions of the survey. Likewise, the LWCF agency survey do participate in outdoor recreation, what do think is mostd in nee responses were kept separate. While the Final Survey Results report of improvement? primarily focuses on results from the randomly selected sample of residents, all surveys were considered in the overall analysis of the The higher percentages of respondent feedback indicated a need data and were broken out separately in the tables included in the for more restrooms (33% of respondents), a lack of awareness of Appendix of the Final Survey Results document dated July 2009. the programs/facilities offered (33%), and high price/user fees (32%).
44 State of New Mexico
Also important to respondents was no time/other personal issues Figure 12: Aspects of Outdoor Recreation Needing (27%), location of facilities (23%), safety and security (22%), and Improvement cost/availability of required equipment (camping gear, etc.—20%). Restroom availability and maintenance 22% 15% 11% 47%
Overall maintenance of parks 10% 6% 6% 21% A third tier of factors included a lack of facilities and amenities, such Amenities maintenance (e.g., playgrounds, shelters, etc.) 6% 7% 8% 20% as showers and water at campgrounds and more campsites (17%), Number of parks 10% 6% 3% 19% hours of operation (16%), and overall maintenance (15%). Trail maintenance (e.g., surface repair, weeds, etc.) 3% 7% 9% 19%
Quality of signage 6% 7% 5% 19% What three aspects of outdoor recreation are most in need of Quality of outdoor recreation programs offered 6% 4% 8% 18% improvement? Number or amount of open space/ natural areas available 6% 6% 4% 16%
Quality and maintenance of open space/ natural areas 7% 8% 15%
This question provided the opportunity to not only see what aspects Number of trails available 6% 5% 4% 15% are currently viewed positively by respondents, but also to get an Variety of nature and environment programs offered 3% 8% 4% 15% idea of how important it would be to improve each one and how Customer service of staff 8% 3% 3% 13% respondents prioritize these improvements in relation to each Quality of parks 4% 4% 6% 13% other. Not surprisingly, “restroom availability and maintenance” is Connectivity of trails 4% 5% 3% 12% ranked, by far, the highest priority in need of improvement (22% of Hours of operation of visitors centers 3% 3% 5% 10% Most in need of improvement respondents indicating that it is their top choice and 47% indicated Quality of visitors centers 8% Second most in need of improvement that it is one of their top three priorities). Overall quality of experience 3% Third most in need of improvement
Most other top priorities were generally within a few percentage 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% points from one another, but were led by overall maintenance of Percent Responding parks (10% of respondents indicating it is their top priority and 21% In what activities do you participate? indicating that it is one of their top three priorities). Following closely was number of parks (10% top choice, 19% within top three The survey provided a list of forty‐one outdoor recreation activities choices) and amenities maintenance (playgrounds, shelters, etc.— and first asked respondents how frequently they and their 6% top choice, 20% within top three choices). immediate family participate in each activity. Activities having the highest incidence of participation include the following (all have Figure 12 illustrates the responses. 50% or greater levels of participation): Walking (93%) Picnics /relaxing at the park (90%) Visiting open space and natural areas (83%) Hiking /backpacking (72%) Fishing—lakes/rivers (72%)
Tent camping (69%) Playgrounds (65%)
2010 – 2014 SCORP 45
Bird watching/wildlife viewing (61%) What about trails? Swimming outdoors (58%) Respondents were asked to indicate how important various aspects Running /jogging (56%) of trail improvements in New Mexico were to them and their RV/trailer camping (with electric/water hookups) (53%) household. Eight of the nine categories were rated relatively Bicycling (road) (52%) important to the respondents overall, with 56 to 66 percent Special events at outdoor facilities/amphitheaters (52%) responses of 4 or 5 “very important” on the 5‐point scale. At the same time, a certain percentage of the population (generally around How important is adding, expanding, or improving facilities to 20%) considered most of the trail amenities as not important accommodate activities in New Mexico? (ratings of 1 or 2). For each activity, the survey then asked respondents to rate on a 1 to 5 scale the importance they feel should be placed on adding, Rated highest was providing trail amenities (benches, trash expanding, or improving facilities/amenities to accommodate those containers, drinking fountains, dog pick‐up bag dispensers, signage, activities in the State of New Mexico. As indicated, the highest etc.—66% very important). Next was improving trail maintenance ratings of importance generally coincided with the greatest levels of (64%), improving trail connectivity between towns and participation discussed in the previous question (not surprisingly): neighborhoods (63%), building neighborhood trails (62%), adding or expand trailheads (60%), building more soft surface trails (58%), Walking (75% ratings of “very important,” a rating of 4 or 5 improving trail connectivity to regional trails outside of your town on the 5‐point scale) (58%), and building regional trail systems (56%). Rated lowest was Fishing—lakes/rivers (72% very important) building more paved trails (43% very important and 40% not Visiting open space and natural areas (70%) important).
Picnics/relaxing at the park (68%)
Tent camping (68%)
Playgrounds (63%)
Hiking/backpacking (61%)
RV/trailer camping (with electric/water hookups) (60%) Environmental education/interpretive signage (57%) Running /jogging (56%) Hunting (55%) Special events at outdoor facilities/amphitheaters (54%) Swimming outdoors (52%) Bird watching/wildlife viewing (50%) Bicycling (road) (50%) Sledding/snow play (45%) Field sports (baseball, soccer, football, etc.) (44%) Boating with motor (44%)
46 State of New Mexico
Figure 13 illustrates the rankings for trails. Figure 14 illustrates the rankings for open space.
Figure 13: Importance of Trail Amenities Figure 14: Importance of Undeveloped Open Space Provide other trail amenities (benches, trash containers, 66% 88% 20% drinking fountains, dog pick-up bag dispensers, signage, etc.) Preserve wildlife habitat 4% 64% Improve trail maintenance 14% 86% Protect rivers, arroyos, and wetlands (reduce flood potential) 6% 63% Improve trail connectivity between towns and neighborhoods 22% 82% Preservation/ restoration of sensitive environmental areas 8% 62% Build neighborhood trails 19% Preserve views and view corridors 80% 60% 8% Add or expand trailheads 17% 79% 58% Create wildlife viewing opportunities 10% Build more soft surface trails 20% Preserve cultural and historic land uses (e.g., farming, ranching, 58% 78% Improve trail connectivitiy to regional trails (outside of your town) 23% mining) 10%
56% 77% Build regional trail systems 20% Provide access for people to natural areas 11%
43% Build more paved trails 40% Create buffers between adjacent communities 62% 4 & 5 (Very important) 15% 1 & 2 (Not at all important) 4 & 5 (Very important) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1 & 2 (Not at all important) Percent Responding Percent Responding
Of the programs your household has a need for, how well are What about open space? those needs currently being met? Respondents were asked to indicate how important various aspects of open space improvements/functions were to them and their Of the respondents who indicated a need for each of these household. As shown in the following figure, most aspects of open programs or activities, the level at which their need is being met is space were rated higher or more important than trails aspects relatively low for most programs. Rated the highest was boating discussed on the previous page (seven out of eight categories rated safety with 37 percent of respondents indicating that 75 to 100 77 to 88 percent or 4 or 5 “very important” on a 5‐point scale). percent of their needs were being met. However, 44 percent of Rated highest was preservation of wildlife habitats (88%), followed respondents indicated that their needs were not being met by the closely by protection of rivers, arroyos, and wetlands (86%). Next current boating safety programs that are available. As shown in was preservation/restoration of sensitive environmental areas Figure 15, greater proportions of respondents in each category (82%), preserving view and view corridors (80%), creating wildlife indicated that the programs, activities, and events were not viewing opportunities (79%), preserving cultural and historic land meeting the needs of their household (0‐25% of needs being met), uses (e.g., farming, ranching, mining—78%), and providing access than the proportion that indicated that their needs were actually for people to natural areas (77%). Although still important, rated being met. lowest was creating buffers between adjacent communities (62% very important).
2010 – 2014 SCORP 47
Figure 15 illustrates the responses. Figure 16 shows how respondents answered this question.
Figure 15: How Well Needs for Programs are Currently Met Figure 16: Importance of Education Facilities to Add, Expand,
37% or Improve Boating safety 44%
36% Outdoor recreation skills 42% 80% Historic/ prehistoric sites 8% 30% Nature and science programs 40% 76% Historic buildings 11% Birding 29% 49% 76% Zoo 14% Cultural heritage programs 27% 4 & 5 (75-100% of needs being met) 31% Museums 72% 1 & 2 (0-25% of needs being met) 10% 27% Outdoor classroom programs/ field trips 61% 68% Exhibits 11% Programs for senior citizens/ active adults 60+ 23% 65% 49% Nature center 10%
22% 65% Night sky/ astronomy 58% Visitors centers 11%
17% 59% Special events 61% Interpretive signs 16%
Amphitheater 53% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 26% 46% Multi-purpose space for meetings, parties, etc. 32% Percent Responding 4 & 5 (Very important) 37% Classrooms 32% 1 & 2 (Not at all important)
How important is adding, expanding, or improving Outdoor 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Education facilities? Percent Responding
Respondents were also asked to rate the importance of several Importance‐Satisfaction Matrix education facilities that could be added, expanded, or improved in It is instructive to compare and plot the importance scores against the State of New Mexico. As shown in Figure 16, most of the the satisfaction scores into an “Importance‐Satisfaction” matrix, as education facilities received very high ratings, including illustrated in Figure 17. Note that many of the facilities listed as historic/prehistoric sites (80% responses of 4 or 5 “very important” meeting the needs of the community are also considered the most on a 5‐point scale), historic buildings (76% very important), zoo important to the community (National Parks and Monuments, city (76%), museums (72%), exhibits (68%), nature center (65%), and facilities, New Mexico State Parks, and U.S. Forest Service land). visitor centers (65%). Rated somewhat lower, although still Outdoor recreation on BLM lands and on Pueblo or Tribal lands, relatively important, were interpretive signs (59% very important/ while considered somewhat less important to the community as a 16% not important), amphitheater (53% very important/26% not whole, are not meeting the needs for many respondents. County important), and multi‐purpose space for meetings, parties, etc. parks and recreation facilities may represent a second priority by (46% very important/32% not important). Classrooms were this measure with slightly higher importance to the community, but considered least important (37% very important/32% not similar levels of unmet need. important).
48 State of New Mexico
Figure 17: Importance/Satisfaction Matrix Northwest Service Area Needs Importance/Satisfaction Matrix Aspects of Outdoor Recreation in New Mexico Most in Need of Improvement: Restroom availability and maintenance was ranked, Higher Importance/ Higher Importance/ Lower Unmet Need Higher Unmet Need 4.6 by far, as the single highest priority in need of improvement in the
City parks, open space, & National Parks and Monuments Northwest service area (55%), more than any other service area. facilities New Mexico State Parks 4.4 Amenities maintenance (playgrounds, shelters, etc.) was next
USFS Land County parks, open space, & (30%—second only to the Northeast), followed by number of parks facilities 4.2 (26%—second only to the Southeast), overall maintenance of parks (21%), and number or amount of open space/natural areas available 4 (21%—more than any other service area).
BLM Lands 3.8 Activities/Facilities/Amenities Most in Need of Addition, Expansion, or Improvement: Similar to the statewide response, 3.6 fishing on lakes and rivers was the top response for expansion/improvement in the Northwest (38%), followed by 3.4 rating) (average community the to facility each of Importance walking (24%), picnics/relaxing at the park (22%), tent camping (19%), and hunting (18%). Compared to the other service areas, the 3.2 Lower Importance/ Lower Importance/ Northwest had the highest level of response for boat launch Lower Unmet Need Higher Unmet Need Pueblo or Tribal Lands ramps/docks (14%), dog parks (13%), ATV/off‐road recreation/OHV 3 parks (11%), bird watching/wildlife viewing (10%), and jet skiing/ wave‐running (9%). 4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 How well needs are currently being met (average rating) Service Area Analysis Most Important Trails and Open Space Facilities/Amenities: As a general comment, many of the overriding themes and findings Consistent with the other service areas, preserving wildlife habitat at the State level discussed in previous sections of the report tend was considered most important (55%), followed by creating wildlife to be consistent across the five service area regions studied. viewing opportunities (37%—more than any other service area), Variations exist in the percentage response for the priorities from protect rivers / arroyos /wetlands (31%), and provide trail amenities service area to service area (and some of the priorities are slightly (benches/trash containers/etc.—23%). different from area to area), but for the most part, the top priorities tend to be similar in each of the areas. We should again mention Need for Programs or Events: Outdoor recreation skills programs that sample sizes at the service area level of analysis are much was mentioned most frequently by far (71%—more than any service smaller than at the aggregate state level analysis and, as such, area), followed by boating safety (61%—more than any service caution should be exercised when interpreting these results. Some area), cultural heritage programs (58%—more than any service of the specific unique characteristics of each service area are area), nature and science programs (57%), programs for seniors summarized as follows. citizens/active adults 60+ (57%), outdoor classroom programs/field trips (55%), and night sky/astronomy (55%).
2010 – 2014 SCORP 49
Opinion Concerning Current Users Fees Charged to Access New Need for Programs or Events: Programs for seniors citizens/active Mexico State Parks: Consistent with the other service areas, adults 60+ was mentioned most frequently (55%), followed by respondents in the Northwest are also of the opinion that current outdoor recreation skills programs (52%), boating safety (48%), user fees are “about right,” with nearly three‐quarters (73%) outdoor classroom programs/field trips (46%), and night responding as such. Thirteen percent feel the current fees are “too sky/astronomy (46%). Compared to the other service areas, much” while three percent feel they are “too little.” Eleven percent respondents ine th Northeast were more likely to mention both are uncertain or don’t know. birding programs (41%) and special events (30%).
Northeast Service Area Needs Opinion Concerning Current Users Fees Charged to Access New Aspects of Outdoor Recreation in New Mexico Most in Need of Mexico State Parks: Consistent with the other service areas, Improvement: In a departure from the other service areas, respondents in the Northeast are of the opinion that current user amenities maintenance (playgrounds, shelters, etc.) was mentioned fees are “about right” (52%). However, they were most likely to say most often in the Northeast as the single highest priority in need of that current fees are “too little” (31%—more than any service area). improvement (42%). Quality of visitor centers was next (40%), Only six percent felt that fees were “too much” while 11 percent followed by quality of signage (29%), and then restroom availability were uncertain or don’t know. and maintenance (23%). Central Service Area Needs Activities/Facilities/Amenities Most in Need of Addition, Aspects of Outdoor Recreation in New Mexico Most in Need of Expansion, or Improvement: Similar to the statewide response, Improvement: Restroom availability and maintenance was ranked fishing on lakes and rivers was the top response for as the single highest priority in need of improvement in the Central expansion/improvement in the Northeast (74%—more than any service area (46%), consistent with the other service areas (except service area), followed by tent camping (34%), and environmental for the Northeast, as discussed). Quality of outdoor recreation education/interpretive signage (32%). programs offered was next (29%—more than any service area), followed by connectivity of trails (22%—more than any service Most Important Trails and Open Space Facilities/Amenities: area), and quality of parks (22%—more than any service area). Consistent with the other service areas, preserving wildlife habitat was considered most important (55%), followed by preserving Activities/Facilities/Amenities Most in Need of Addition, cultural and historic land uses (56%—more than any other service Expansion, or Improvement: While fishing tends to be the top area), preservation/restoration of sensitive environmental areas activity/amenity desired in the other service areas, walking (trails) (41%—more than any service area), and protecting was the top response for expansion/improvement in the Central rivers/arroyos/wetlands (34%—consistent with the other service service area (29%). Fishing on lakes/rivers was next (25%), followed areas). by hiking/backpacking (19%—more than any service area). Unique to the Central service areas was the mention of basketball at ten percent.
50 State of New Mexico
Most Important Trails and Open Space Facilities/Amenities: Activities/Facilities/Amenities Most in Need of Addition, Consistent with the other service areas, preserving wildlife habitat Expansion or Improvement: Similar to the statewide response, was considered most important (60%), followed by providing trail fishing on lakes and rivers was the top response for amenities (benches/trash containers/etc. at 26 percent—more than expansion/improvement in the Southwest (42%), followed by any service area), preserving cultural and historic land uses (24%), walking (29%), playgrounds (27%—more than any service area), and building more soft surface trails (21%—more than any service hunting (20%), and road biking (20%—more than any service area). area). Most Important Trails and Open Space Facilities/Amenities: Need for Programs or Events: Night sky/astronomy was mentioned Consistent with the other service areas, preserving wildlife habitat most frequently (59%—more than any service area), followed was considered most important (47%), followed by protecting closely by nature and science programs (58%), outdoor recreation rivers/arroyos/wetlands (39%—one of the strongest responses), skills programs (52%), and outdoor classroom programs/field trips preserving cultural and historic land uses (38%), and improving trail (51%). connectivity between towns and neighborhoods (22%—slightly greater response than the other service areas). Respondents from Opinion Concerning Current Users Fees Charged to Access New the Southwest were also more likely, compared to the other service Mexico State Parks: Consistent with the other service areas, areas, to mention building more paved trails (17%). respondents in the Central service area were also of the opinion that current user fees were “about right,” with nearly three‐ Need for Programs or Events: Nature and science programs were quarters (71%) responding as such. Only four percent felt that the mentioned most frequently (65%—more than any service area), current fees were “too much” while four percent feel they are “too followed by outdoor classroom programs/field trips (59%—slightly little.” Twenty percent are uncertain or don’t know (more than any more than the other service areas), outdoor recreation skills service area). programs (56%), and cultural heritage programs (49%).
Southwest Service Area Needs Opinion Concerning Current Users Fees Charged to Access New Aspects of Outdoor Recreation in New Mexico Most in Need of Mexico State Parks: Consistent with the other service areas, Improvement: Restroom availability and maintenance was ranked respondents in the Southwest were also of the opinion that current as the single highest priority in need of improvement in the user fees are “about right,” with 69 percent responding as such. Southwest service area (43%), consistent with the other service Only three percent felt that the current fees were “too much” while areas. Mentioned more often compared to the other service areas, 15 percent felt they were “too little” (a greater response than however, was overall maintenance of parks (40%—much greater average). Thirteen percent are uncertain or don’t know. compared to the other areas), trail maintenance (39%—also a much greater response), quality and maintenance of open space/natural areas (24%), and customer service of staff (20%).
2010 – 2014 SCORP 51
Southeast Service Area Needs Opinion Concerning Current Users Fees Charged to Access New Aspects of Outdoor Recreation in New Mexico Most in Need of Mexico State Parks: Consistent with the other service areas, Improvement: Restroom availability and maintenance was ranked respondents in the Southeast were also of the opinion that current as the single highest priority in need of improvement in the user fees were “about right,” with 70 percent responding as such. Southeast service area (41%), again, consistent with the other Sixteen percent felt that the current fees were “too much” (the service areas. Number of parks was next (29%—more than any strongest response in this regard from any service area) while seven other service area), followed by trail maintenance (26%—second in percent felt that they were “too little.” Only six percent were response only to the Southwest), and quality of outdoor recreation uncertain or don’t know. programs offered (25%—second in response only to the Central service area).
Activities/Facilities/Amenities Most in Need of Addition, Expansion or Improvement: Fishing on lakes and rivers was the top response for expansion/improvement in the Southeast), (26% although at a somewhat lesser level compared to the other service areas. Next was RV/trailer camping (23%—slightly more than the other service areas), picnics/relaxing at the park (21%), hunting (20%), visiting open space and natural areas (20%), and playgrounds (20%). Compared to the other service areas, the Southwest had the greatest level of response for special events at outdoor facilities/ amphitheaters (12%).
Most Important Trails and Open Space Facilities/Amenities: Consistent with the other service areas, preserving wildlife habitat was considered most important (56%), followed by preserving cultural and historic land uses (39%), protecting rivers/arroyos/wetlands (35%), creating wildlife viewing opportunities (33%), and providing access for people to natural areas (25%—more than any service area).
Need for Programs or Events: Outdoor classroom programs/field trips was mentioned most frequently (54%), followed closely by nature and science programs (52%), programs for seniors citizens/ active adults 60+ (52%), and night sky/astronomy (46%).
52 State of New Mexico
Local Government Survey ‐ Capacity Analysis The results allow the comparative range to be seen for each type of component In addition to the resident survey, a separate survey was conducted “Continued among the communities represented in of all incorporated city, town, and county agencies within the State efforts to the table. For example, the acres of of New Mexico as identified through the previous inventory data maximize developed parks per 1000 persons ranges set. This survey accompanied the inventory verification process and availability of from a low of 5.38 in Rio Rancho to a high included questions that identified organizational issues, program open space is of 46.99 in Carlsbad. This suggests that needs, and priorities to inform New Mexico State Parks on how they the amount of developed parkland per much may better integrate, partner, collaborate, and assist the local capita within communities across the appreciated. government agencies in their outdoor recreation and land use state varies widely. Using this information This is why efforts. Agencies were also asked to voluntarily provide existing GIS alone to arrive at conclusions about the many of us data for a statewide completion of data assimilation, and all data relative level of service in one community provided and verified was included in the SCORP digital files. The live in NM, versus another is not recommended Government Survey questionnaire can be found in Appendix E. and why we because there are many variables besides love NM.” number of acres that affect service. Seven cities or towns, three county agencies, twelve state parks, However, if information like that found in and six federal agencies or national forests responded to the survey this table can be expanded to include along with completing verification of their inventory. School districts most of the state, it might be combined with a variety of statistics and the Sovereign Nations did not respond. The resulting survey and public input on needs and desires for recreation to come up response analysis includes comparative capacities, as well as issue with a set of norms or guidelines to improve future planning efforts. identification, and program needs.
Limitations of the Survey Table 9 shows a compilation of the Local Government Survey results for certain information gathered in the survey. This data represents The goal of the 2009 SCORP was to create a statewide‐ verified another level of detail beyond the SCORP data model described inventory of all federal, state, county, municipal, and local providers later in this report. in one database that could then be mapped and analyzed for capacity and level of service. Unfortunately, due to extenuating Capacity circumstances, an inadequate project timeframe prohibited getting For the towns and cities in the table, population data was obtained all the inventory collected, verified, and updated. Please refer to the from the website www.city‐data.com and entered so that 2009 Planning Methodology section of the Planning Context chapter calculations could be made to determine the ratio of components to for more information. population. This is similar to the traditional capacities‐based
“standards” published in the past by the National Recreation and
Parks Association.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 53
Table 9: Government Survey ‐ Outdoor Recreation Inventory Summary
s s k d rs rs e fields s ark par ools ou p ls s p am h ce hou lic i V s ball e r r i /const. ic b pace ra il s s n v e u s t AT lters unds ll/ r r ing ee eer p ‐motorize / ra o use a ds ite sh prog tio t ser t t ‐ b l urts s a s ou oo m a r publ v n us HV d she e e oor o p e c d e p lun o e o i‐ e s fi d c m rk lf t pools m iv it d open n lt O a ll ffl a o u t tici vo volun dev f f u playgr mul b a ca o p g o swi r l o of o of oriz f f b out f g f f a a vis of s m s t picnic o of ti o of o o of o o p u r re res les e o . . ft setball . d . . n fo nual maintenanc i il m o o so No. o o asonal o terpre Agency No. Ac Ac M M No. N No. N ba No. N No. N se N In An An for Town/City (7) City of Ruidoso Downs 2 12.782 9.4 0.602101200 000N/AN/AN/A Town of Taos 3 40 60 803322200 001 indoor N/A N/A N/A City of Grants 16 140 40 5065474011‐18 hole 0 0 N/A N/A N/A City of Clovis P & R 17 618 3075 8 4 35 18 15 14 6 0‐par 0 3; 1 1‐18 hole 1 leisure 1 ind; 1 out N/A N/A N/A City of Raton 11 200 100 5unknown84240001‐9hole1 0 ind; 1 out N/A 0 0 Los Lunas 15 122 1600 503913361640 0006000 City of Carlsbad 43 1,204 300 0.908337235001‐par3; 1‐18 hole 0 1indoor N/A 0 160 School District none reported County (3) Grant County 3 42 42 10017353203 000N/A03,000 Santa Fe County Open Space & Trail 13 143 5,767 35 0 23 7 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 700 400 1,500 McGee Park, San Juan County 3 104 104 00320035750000N/AN/AN/A State (12) Sumner Lake 1 400,000210,000 2 N/A 49 1 0 0 0 49 0 0 0 0 800 400 Bottomless Lakes State Park 1 1,400 1,400 4.506910006900001 beach 3,100 3000 3000 City of Rocks 55 2,000 11 55 0 0 0 1,460 1,460 Oasis 1 194 16 1 1 0 0 23 0 0 1,700 480 400 Clayton Lake 1 500 500 2.5 37 37 0 0 0 1,500 Manzano Mtn. 37 15 202 5060000370 000120 people 67 67 Storie Lake 47 82 75 N/AN/A47121N/A470 000150‐200 2,100 2,400 Villanueva 2 50 16,029 3.5 0 4 1 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 180 625 625 Sugarite 1 3,600 3,600 15 0 10 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 4000 5,200 1,000 Oliver Lee Memorial 1 640 440 0.5 60 6 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 1270 1,041 462 Santa Rosa Lake 6 50 500 2.50761000900 0005002,0000 Heron Lake 200 2,000 5,400 16.5 0 17 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 500 3,000+ 400+ Federal (6) Chaco Culture National Historical Park 1 33.974 0 22.9 0 9 0 0 0 0 144 0 0 0 3200 people 14,209 Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands, Cibola NationalForest 330136,505 2.25 20000190 000N/AN/AN/A DOI ‐ NatioanlPark Service Bandelie 22033677 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 545,000 21213.5 1241 USDA, Ciabola NF, Sandia Ranger Dis 58 81,880 154 62 7 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 40,000 5,973 19,834 White Sands 1 143,733 143,743 7 0 55 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 12,558 3,798 N/A Fort Union 1 721N/A 1.600000000 00012,0002,000N/A
54 State of New Mexico
Local Government Issues Federal Agencies and National Forests Issues Through the survey, local participating New Mexico towns and cities The top five identified issues for participating New Mexico’s federal identified their top five issues as: agencies and National Forests include: Maintaining existing recreation infrastructure, resources. Maintaining existing recreation infrastructure, resources. Insufficient resources to fund budget. Ensuring visitor safety. Establishing year to date stability of agency’s budget. Maintaining natural resource condition. Creating the capacity to serve a growing population. Insufficient resources to fund budget. Maintaining natural resource conditions. Ensuring the capacity to serve a growing population.
County Government Issues Local Government Program Needs The top five identified issues for participating counties include: The top three identified program needs for local participating New Insufficient resources to fund budget. Mexico towns and cities included: Establishing year to date stability of agency’s budget. Youth programs. Ensuring visitor safety. Specialized recreation programs and services. Maintaining existing recreation infrastructure, resources. Field and team sports. Maintaining natural resource conditions. County Government Program Needs State Parks Issues The top three identified program needs for participating New The top five identified issues for participating State Parks include: Mexico counties include: Ensuring visitor safety. Specialized recreation programs and services. Maintaining existing recreation infrastructure, resources. Youth, adult, and senior programs. Establishing year to date stability of agency’s budget. Multi‐use trails. Insufficient resources to fund budget. Maintaining natural resource condition. State Parks Program Needs The top three identified program needs for participating New Mexico State Parks include: Developed parks and amenities. Multi‐use trails. Youth programs.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 55
Federal Agencies/National Forests Program Needs The top three identified program needs for participating federal agencies and National Forests include: Nature and wildlife. Multi‐use trails. Youth programs.
56 State of New Mexico
Inventory and Level of Service by Region GIS Data Link or Contact – The person or place through which GIS data fore the sit can be obtained. A major goal for the New Mexico SCORP project was to create a Latitude, Longitude, and Geoaddress – Location‐specific digital geospatial database to represent the footprint of outdoor recreation facilities in the state. An initial compilation of existing, information for the site. known recreation sites was prepared in spreadsheet form. This Reference – The location on the site that is the reference point included sites owned or managed by federal, state, tribal, and local for the GIS (center, entrance, landmark, etc.). governments as well as private providers such as golf courses, ski Facility Address – Postal address for the site. areas, water parks, horse ranches, hot springs, and others. The Size – Estimated size of the site in acres. initial list was compiled from a variety of sources, including previous Trail Length – Estimated length of trails in miles. SCORP data, internet web sites, and Geographic Information County – Within which the site is located. Systems (GIS) files. Administrator/Provider – The agency responsible for the site as it relates to recreation. The dataset was organized into a set of records with attributes, with Contact Name, Office Address, Phone, and Email – each record relating to a single recreation site. A recreation site can Information for the contact person for this record. be a variety of things, such as a municipal park, forest campground, Category, Type and Jurisdiction of Provider – Category and recreational trail, or picnic grounds. It may also be a much larger Type as integrated from previous lists. Jurisdiction is the feature such as a state park, cultural or historice site, lak or category that the data model will use to sort and filter the reservoir, or a national park, forest, or wilderness area. records. Agency Defined Park Type – Classification within the agency’s A set of attributes for each record were defined and are described own system (if any). as follows: Classification – Classification of the site within the SCORP Service Area – One of the five areas of the state used in the dataset, from a drop‐down list of options provided in the data SCORP within which the site is located. model. State Parks Region – One of the seven regions into which Park Status – Open, fee, planned, restricted, decommissioned, the state is divided for management purposes by New etc. Mexico State Parks within which the site is located. Catchment Area – The distance as a radius in miles within Standard Name – The official name by which the managing which a majority of userst migh be reasonably expected to agency refers to the site. travel to reach the site. Other Common Name – Other names that may be Comments – Other information associated with the record for commonly used to refer to the site. the site. GIS Data Availability – A yes/no indication of whether or not the SCORP team has GIS data for the site in its possession.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 57
These attributes were selected to represent items of information Limitations of the Inventory Data Collection that could be useful in gaining a clear picture of what facilities for The goal of the 2009 SCORP was to create a statewide‐verified outdoor recreation are available in New Mexico, where they are inventory of all federal, state, county, municipal, and local providers located, who manages them, what their intended function or into one database that could then be mapped and analyzed for purpose might be, and what geographic area they primarily serve. capacity and level of service. Unfortunately, due to extenuating An attempt was also made to mesh the attributes with those being circumstances, an inadequate project timeframe prohibited getting collected by other programs, particularly the one being conducted all the inventory collected, verified and updated. Please refer to the by the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA). The 2009 Planning Methodology section of the Planning Context chapter following is an excerpt from the NRPA’s web site posted on July 2, for more information. For a detailed analysis of the limitations of 2009: the collected data, please see Appendix F. The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) with support from American Park and Recreation Society (APRS) Statewide Inventory Captured and National Society for Park Resources (NSPR) Branches The compiled dataset contained over 2,300 records as of mid‐ are working to develop a set of attributes, values and data September 2009. The completeness and accuracy of the attributes transfer standards for parks, trails and recreation facilities vary from one record to another. There are also some notable gaps for use with non‐federal resources. Attributes are types of in the dataset. One is parks and other facilities owned, operated, or information about a resource; for example park size or park managed by Home Owners Associations (HOAs). Other private type. Values are predefined responses for an attribute or facilities exist that may not be in the dataset, including pools, tennis instructions on how the attribute should be reported; for courts, and other facilities at apartment complexes. Another gap example, park size being reported in acres versus square that may be more easily addressed are sites owned and managed by feet. The overarching purpose of this project is to have local public, private, and parochial schools, as well as colleges and governments collect a basic set of information consistently universities. in their GIS systems that will allow for better local, regional
and statewide management and planning of park and A decision was made in conducting this study to focus the resources recreation resources. of time and funds available on setting up the data model for the
providers that were readily known and identifiable, rather than
focusing efforts on expanding the list of providers. It was felt that
this would be the most effective first step towards what is
ultimately hoped to be a fairly complete and accurate accounting of
the outdoor recreation resources available through all providers in New Mexico.
58 State of New Mexico
Filtering of the dataset shows the following breakdown for number Resource Maps of sites in the dataset within some of the classifications: A series of maps were prepared using data from the survey and the inventory. The maps are called Resource Maps because they provide 21 ‐ Conservation a resource for presentation of the data and further analyses that 12 ‐ Historic/Cultural might be performed using the data. The first set of maps, Maps A, B, 820 ‐ Park (including state parks) and C, show general information about the state. The next six maps 2 ‐ Pool (D through I) use geocoding to represent the results of the 200 ‐ Special Use statistically‐valid survey and combine this with data from the 262 ‐ Trail/Greenway Corridor inventory dataset to allow for comparisons to be made between 1 ‐ Byway certain responses to the survey and the locations of recreation 116 ‐ Campground resources relevant to the activity referred to in the response. This is 3 ‐ Fish Hatchery presented primarily as an illustration. Because the dataset is 25 ‐ Fishing incomplete at this time, the maps cannot show a complete picture 31 ‐ Hot Springs of all of the resources that might be available. By continuing to 5 ‐ Ice Pond expand and complete the data model, maps like these can be 47 ‐ Lake/Reservoir produced in the future and will provide useful portrayals of how and 18 ‐ National Forest where recreational needs and desires lay out across the state 11 ‐ National Monument compared to the resources available to support those needs. 3 ‐ National Park 24 ‐ National Recreation Area Maps J and K are intended to display records in the dataset for 21 ‐ National Wilderness which location‐specific data is adequate to allow for mapping with 45 ‐ Picnic Area the GIS. Not all of the records have complete location‐specific 550 ‐ Trail information, and this is something that should be addressed as the 25 ‐ Wildlife Area data collection and management process continues. 7 ‐ Archery Range 80 ‐ Golf Course The final map is intended to display the known geographic 14 ‐ Horse Ranch information about wetlandse from th dataset. It too is illustrative 9 ‐ Miniature Golf because the data is limited. However, if data on wetlands is added 13 ‐ Ski Area to the dataset, this information could be used for a variety of 3 ‐ Water Park purposes besides recreation. For the purposes of recreation, it would be useful to determine where the resources are that support recreation activities such as bird watching, wildlife viewing, nature study and environmental education.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 59
Resource Map A – Study Area This map shows the boundaries of the Study Area, which coincides with the State of New Mexico. The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. According to the GIS, this area encompasses 121,643 square miles. For the purposes of the SCORP, the state was divided into five Service Areas: Northwest, Northeast, Central, Southwest, and Southeast.
Resource Map B – Land Use This map shows the major types of land use by agency according to the GIS. White or non‐shaded areas are private lands, and incorporated areas are shaded in a light blue color. At this scale, there may be in‐holdings and smaller parcels of other land uses within the shaded and colored areas of each land use type. The GIS‐ derived areas for several major land uses, and the percentage of the total state that represents, is shown below: BLM – 29,472 square miles (24%) BIA – 28,454 square miles (23%) USFS – 23,091 square miles Mi (19%) DOS – 4,995 square miles (4%) The sizes of the service areas are: Other – 1,761 square miles (1.4%) Northwest – 28,242 square miles Total = 87,773 square miles (71%) Northeast – 27,871 square miles Central – 1,169 square miles The “Other” category includes National Park Service and other Southwest – 32,021 square miles agency lands. Southeast – 32, 340 square miles
60 State of New Mexico
The map below is shown as a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A The map below is shown a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
Resource Map C – Population per Square Mile This map shows the average population density (2007 ESRI estimate) for each zip code in New Mexico. Densities range from a low of zero persons per square mile to a high of 6,621 persons per square mile. The highest densities are found in zip codes in the Northeast part of Albuquerque. While perhaps high for New Mexico, densities of 6,000 persons per square mile are normal for parts of most cities in the United States. In the most densely populated areas of some U. S. cities, densities may approach 30,000 persons per square mile.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 61
Resource Map D – Fishing Needs of Survey Respondents The symbols show that, like the overall responses to the survey, This map plots the survey responses to questions 12 and 13 in the responses that place a high importance on fishing come from all survey. The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative across the state in a fairly even distribution. In general, no purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. concentrations of fishing lovers versus non‐fishers appear on the map. This shows that expanded or improved opportunities for The yellow symbols represent survey respondents who did not rank fishing are not only highly desired by many people, they are also “Fishing‐Lake/Rivers” as items most in need of addition, expansion, desired by people in all parts of the state and in all types of or improvement, while the red symbols represent ones who did. communities, from the more dense urban areas to the rural ones. The symbols are placed randomly within the zip code from which Proximity to major rivers, lakes, and other water bodies does not that response was received, so they may not necessarily overlay the appear to affect the distribution of responses to this question exact location of the respondent’s address. either.
The fact that the symbols showing US Forest Service fishing sites in the dataset are clustered in a few areas does not mean that fishing opportunities are limited to those areas. Instead, it is a reflection of the fact that not all agencies that provide sites for fishing have submitted data and that the inventory needs to be more complete for fishing sites. Because this question ranked high in the survey for needs, focusing on adding fishing locations to the dataset may need to be a priority for the near future.
62 State of New Mexico
Resource Map E – Walking Needs of Survey Respondents per Zip Code This map uses the same symbol format as Map D to display the answers to the survey that indicate opportunities for walking as most in need of addition, expansion, or improvement. Like Map D, there is no obvious clustering of responses, indicating that walking is desired in all parts of the state and among people in both urban and rural areas. The map in the next column is shown as a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
The symbols on the map that show where Trail/Greenway corridors in the dataset are located illustrate how a complete inventory of such facilities could help show where trails are needed in relation to desires for walking. At the same time, the fact that publicly‐owned lands such as those managed by the BLM and Forest Service are shown on the map offers a good comparison of where public lands Resource Map F – Picnics/Relaxing at the Park Needs of Survey that are open for walking are located in relation to desires for Respondents per Zip Code walking. However, a lack of transportation, access routes, parking This map plots the responses to the survey related to the need for areas, adequately marked routes, appropriate trail surfaces, or improved or expanded opportunities for these activities. As in the other factors may be inhibiting some users from enjoying this previous maps, these responses are evenly distributed across the activity on those lands. The relative lack of such lands in the state. Like Map E, picnicking and relaxing are activities that Northeast Service area would suggest that there is a higher unmet theoretically can be done on most of the lands owned by the BLM, need in that part of the state, and that perhaps a focus should be Forest Service, and others, but similar factors of access and placed on providing more public trails in that area. improvements could inhibit the use of those lands for these activities for some people.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 63
The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
Resource Map H – RV/Trailer Camping (With Electric/Water Hookups) Needs of Survey Respondents per Zip Code This map show the responses related to the camping resources Resource Map G – Hunting Needs of Survey Respondents per Zip available in developed campgrounds with amenities. Results are Code similar to the other maps in terms of the distribution of responses This map plots responses related to the addition, expansion, or across the state. Symbols for campgrounds in the dataset are also improvement of hunting opportunities. eAgain, th responses are shown. These are all Forest Service campgrounds and may not have well‐distributed, indicating that hunting is important to people all all of the amenities reflected in the survey question. This is one area across the state, in both urban and rural areas. Lands that could where more data for private providers would be beneficial. Also, the potentially be available for hunting, such as those managed by the data model as currently configured is not set up to track whether or BLM and Forest Service, are shown on the map as well. not campgrounds have these amenities. This may be a recommended change in the data model for the future, given the The map showne in th next column is a thumbnail for illustrative relatively high importance of camping (of all types) in the survey purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. responses.
64 State of New Mexico
The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A Further study of the needs and desires of campers of all types may larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. be needed to address this issue more thoroughly.
Resource Map J – Locations This map shows, by classification, each record in the dataset for Resource Map I – Tent Camping Needs of Survey Respondents per which the location‐specific information is adequate for the GIS to Zip Code display its location. Not all of the records in the dataset have This map displays the responses related to tent camping. The map adequate location‐specific information. Obtaining this information shown in the next column is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A for as many records as possible should be a priority as work on the larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G. dataset proceeds. If this is accomplished, it will then be possible to perform a variety of analyses for various types of recreational The distribution shows that tent camping is desired all across the activities that show where the resources for that activity are located state. Campgrounds in the dataset are also displayed, along with in relation to the population and the expressed needs and desires of public lands where camping is normally allowed. Unlike RV/trailer people. This becomes more important as issues like the carbon camping, tent camping can take place in a greater range of footprint created by travel to and from recreation destinations are locations. However, the survey does not provide the information being addressed. Also, the potential to address community health needed to determine what kinds of amenities tent campers desire, issues like obesity and “nature deficit syndrome” by providing such as restrooms, picnic tables, and ramadas/picnic areas, etc. healthy outdoor recreation opportunities in places that are convenient to where people live can be enhanced with this type of analysis.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 65
The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
Resource Map K – Private Providers This map shows all of the private providers in the dataset. The map shown in the next column is a thumbnail fore illustrativ purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
While the County in which they are located is known for most of the private providers, specific addresses are not available for many of them. Therefore, this map displays each provider with a symbol that is randomly placed within the county in which the provider is located. The map gives a sense of where the known private providers are located relative to the overall geography of the state. The distribution of the symbols shows that while the dataset may not be complete, all portions of the state are represented within it. No particular part of the state has been favored over another in the collection of this data. This approach should be continued as the collection of data continues.
66 State of New Mexico
Resource Map L – US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands See Appendix H for more Wetlands information and listings. Inventory Locations This map displays locations for wetlands in the data set where the locations are known. The current location specific data is limited to Township and Range, and each wetland site is positioned on the map randomly within its associated Township and Range. The map shown below is a thumbnail for illustrative purposes. A larger version of the map may be found in Appendix G.
No other composite list of wetlands for New Mexico has been found in the research for the SCORP, so this dataset could be used as the basis for a much more comprehensive listing. This would benefit not only recreationists and recreation providers, who could use this information to plan programs and activities such as bird watching, wildlife viewing, nature study, and environmental education, but also other land management agencies who manage these kinds of lands.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 67
Mandates and Key Issues Matrix Americans with Disabilities Act This section identifies key issues derived from the statewide August 2008 ‐ Dept. of Justice Notice of Proposed Rule Making: community survey, government survey, public and stakeholder The Department of Justice published a Notice of Proposed Rule involvement processes, interviews with staff and the project Making (NPRM) on June 17, 2008 for Nondiscrimination on the Basis 24 steering committee, the previous SCORP, this inventory, and the of Disability in State and Local Government Services. The purpose of this rule is to adopt enforceable accessibility standards under the GRASP® analysis. These various data sources influence the SCORP. One such issue is the impact of Federal mandates.e Th Americans Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 that are “consistent with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a Federal mandate that guarantees with the minimum guidelines and requirements issued by the accessible outdoor recreation services including facilities and Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access programs. The ADA affects not only the design and budgetary Board.” considerations for renovations and new construction, it also influences the provision of services. Under the NPRM, the Department of Justice proposed regulations which, among other things, encompass existing play areas and For example, Washington State Parks provides an accessible recreation facilities as well as golf courses. Title II of the ADA applies outdoor recreation guide. According to its website,23 the accessible to state and local government entities, including park and sites listed in the guide are managed by the Washington State Parks recreation departments, and sets regulations to prevent and Recreation Commission, the Washington Department of Natural discrimination and enforce compliance in services, programs, and Resources, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the activities provided by these entities. Title III applies to private United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, and entities that are considered places of public accommodation. the Olympic National Park. Local or privately managed recreation sites are not included in the listing (except in a few cases where On September 16, 2009, the Commission voted to approve a Notice state grant funds were used to develop a site). of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to conform its ADA regulations to the Amendments Act of 2008. The NPRM was published in the The sites were constructed using current design practices, Access Federal Register on September 23, 2009. The Commission has also Board guidelines and Final Rules, or State building code standards issued a question and answer guide on the NPRM. and recommendations from recreationists with disabilities. Levels of accessibility vary from site to site.
23 24 http://www.parks.wa.gov/ada‐rec/. http://www.nrpa.org.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 69
On September 25, 2008, the President signed the Americans with Forest Service Accessibility Resources Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 ("ADA Amendments Act" The U.S. Forest Service has developed accessibility guidelines to or "Act"). The Act emphasizes that the definition of disability should provide guidance for the agency to maximize accessibility while at be construed in favor of broad coverage of individuals to the the same time recognizing and protecting the unique characteristics maximum extent permitted by the terms of the ADA and generally of the natural setting of outdoor recreation areas and shall not require extensive analysis. Below is a summary of the hiker/pedestrian trails. The Accessibility Guidebook on Outdoor changes made as result of the Amendments Act, which became Recreation and Trails,25 along with other accessibility resources are effective on January 1, 2009. available from the Forest Service’s website.
Key Issues Identified
The Key Issues Matrix (Table 10) identified various issues as a result
of input and analysis. Data sources included both qualitative and
quantitative information.
Qualitative Quantitative
Staff Interviews Community Survey
Steering Committee Government Survey
Stakeholder Interviews Inventory
Public Meetings GRASP® Analysis
Previous SCORP
Key issues include:
Statewide Planning
Outdoor Recreation Facilities/Amenities Outdoor Recreation Programs Public Involvement / Partnerships / Communications / Marketing Staffing and Customer Service (no significant issues identified) Program and User Fees
25 http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility/.
70 State of New Mexico
Table 10: Key Issue Matrix and Analysis 2009 Data Source Service Areas Qualitative Data Quantitative Data Consultant's Analysis and Professional Expertise Key Issue ‐ Rating Scale d ‐ forth priority issue
Survey
and c ‐ third priority issue SCORP
LOS b ‐ opportunity to improve ‐ longer‐term Meetings
Interviews a ‐ priority ‐ short‐term n/a ‐ not applicable Best Practice or Possible Solutions Steering Committee Stakeholder Interviews Public Previous Community Government Survey GRASP® Analysis Northwest Northeast Central Southwest Southeast Staff Statewide Planning Need Statewide GIS of inventory a a c a a a a a a n/a n/a a Complete statewide inventory database in template provided. Work Need Statewide Outdoor Networking aaaaa a a b bn/ac n/a with Bureau of Indian Affairs to identify outreach efforts to reach the Rural versus Urban Outdoor Recreation Planningccccc a a b bn/an/ac Sovereign Nations. Work with Choose Outdoors who is organizing a Participation by Sovereign Nations aaaaa a a c n/an/an/aa statewide outdoor recreation providers network with the USFS. Track Capture useable participation/visitation data a a a a a b b n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a participation/visitation statistics. Cooperation/collaboration among providers bbbbb b b b bn/ac a Outdoor Recreation Facilities/Amenities Restrooms a d a a a n/a n/a a n/a a n/a n/a Trail, Playground or Park Maintenance b a n/a b c c c b a b a n/a Trails b n/a a b n/a a a a a a c a Visitor's Center n/a b n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a d n/a n/a Fishing a a b a a n/a n/a b d an/ab Picnic Areas / Places to Relax b n/a n/a n/a c n/a n/a b d bn/ab Signage n/a c n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a d n/a n/a Incomplete statewide data prohibits accurate level of service (LOS) Hunting c n/a n/a c d n/a n/a n/a n/a c n/a c analysis. Complete statewide inventory database in template Camping c b n/a n/a b n/a n/a c n/a c n/a c provided. Add types of facilities like caverns and types of amenities More parks b n/a n/a n/a b a a b b b a c such as restrooms, put‐ins/take ‐outs, fishing/river access, etc. that More open space / natural areas c n/a n/a n/a d bb b bc b d correlate with survey responses. Boating launch ramps / docks d n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Dog Parks d n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ATV / Off‐roading / OHV parks d n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a b d n/a d n/a Bird Watching / Wildlife Viewing d n/a n/a n/a n/a b c c n/a n/a n/a n/a Jet Skiing d n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Basketball n/a n/a c n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Outdoor Recreation Programs Pursue the creations of a "Children's Forest", expanded transportation aaaaa a a a n/an/aa n/a Connecting children with Nature opportunities, and the "No Child Left Inside" Act. Obesity and sedentary lifestyles aaaaa a a a n/ac c a Focus on trail development & statewide connectivity as first priority. Outdoor recreation skills programs a a c c n/a b c b n/a a b n/a Boating Safety a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a b n/a n/a Culture Heritage b n/a n/a c n/a c c c n/a a c n/a Nature and Science b n/a b a b b c b n/a a b n/a Programs for Seniors b a n/a n/a c n/a n/a n/a n/a a b n/a Incomplete statewide data prohibits accurate level of service (LOS) Outdoor Classroom Programs / Field Trips cbaba b c b n/aa b n/a analysis. Complete statewide inventory database in template Night Sky Programs c b a n/a d n/a n/a n/a n/a a n/a n/a provided. Add types of programs that correlate with survey responses. Environmental Education / Interpretive Signage n/a c n/a n/a n/a b b b d b b n/a Birding n/a c n/a n/a n/a b b n/a n/a b n/a n/a Special Events n/a c n/a n/a d n/a n/a n/a d bcn/a Specialized Recreation n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a b b b n/a n/a b n/a Public Involvement / Communications / Marketing Public doesn't know what's out there c c a a c c a a b c n/a Create statewide networking opportunities and continue to develop Cross marketing and promotions b b a a b b a b b c n/a cross ‐agency/provider relationships. Invest and use GIS and Point of Technology improvements needed aababaa b an/ac a Sale systems technologies. Advocacy a a a a a a a a n/a a n/a Staffing and Customer Service ‐ minor mention in Southwest Program and User Fees Current fees charged by State Parks ‐ too much b cccan/a n/a cn/accn/a Create scholarship programs based on ability to pay versus age.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 71
The Findings The recommendations include strategies to address the necessary The key issues and assumptions for the New Mexico SCORP were completion of information gathering over the next three to four discussed at a meeting with the Project Manager for New Mexico years of this SCORP’s planning cycle. Detailed information should be State Parks on September 10, 2009 in Ruidoso, NM. The top findings obtained for further analysis to determine gaps and current level of follow in no particular order: service for the state. Verifying the inventory data is of upmost importance and
additional amenities should be included. The data should be consolidated and compared through a statewide GIS system. The NM SCORP GIS now follows the NRPA data collection model. A structured and coordinated planning and advocacy network should be developed for all agencies and providers connected to outdoor recreation issues, resources, and management. A connected trail system was the number one mentioned amenity to expand and improve. Fishing spaces in rural and urban areas, capacity, lack of water, and/or transportation to fishing was the second greatest issue. Providing picnicking and relaxation areas was important to many. Hunting is important to New Mexico residents as well tourists. Camping is important to New Mexico residents as well tourists. Providing adequate restrooms as well as desire for addition or expansion of such facilities was the number one maintenance need ‐ proper location is vital, and adequate maintenance is expensive and critical. Connecting children to nature and the obesity epidemic are critical issues facing New Mexicans. The availability and status of the Land and Water Conservation Funds (LWCF) for projects and LWCF planning grants should be marketed and information should be provided as to how and where to obtain matching resources.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 73
Priorities Improve access to outdoor recreation resources and facilities by establishing parks to develop programs that promote health It is imperative for local, state, and federal governments to work and livability and to incorporate those programs into state and collaboratively with private sector organizations to secure a future local outdoor recreation. where New Mexicans live healthier lifestyles, the economic well being of communities is sustained, and wildlife and natural Create more opportunities for youth to engage in outdoor activities. resources are conserved. Attend to segments of the population that are under‐served by existing facilities (e.g., seniors, young adults, Latinos, and Native American populations).
1 Work with statewide organizations such as the Department of 2 Promote the Livability of Enhance Health, Department of Human Services, New Mexico Recreation
All Communities Economic and Park Association, and others to develop programs that Through Vitality promote health and livability. Health and Fitness Build more outdoor classrooms, trails, and playgrounds featuring outdoor recreation skills. 3 4 Priority 2 – Enhance Economic Vitality Properly Use and Conserve Natural Developing a Statewide Resources Trail System Continue to promote outdoor recreation events, programs, and facilities that attract day travelers and overnight visitation by creating partnerships with businesses such as convention and visitor bureaus, recreation equipment vendors, and guide Priority 1 ‐ Promote the Livability of All Communities services. Through Health and Fitness Conduct new or update existing research on the economic benefits of outdoor recreation in New Mexico. Rehabilitate, update, and upgrade existing public outdoor Increase education/knowledge of the benefits/values of recreation facilities to maximize public participation. outdoor recreation in terms of economic impact. Continue expansion or development of new multi‐use urban Rehabilitate, update, and upgrade existing public outdoor trails networks. recreation facilities to maximize marketability.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 75
Priority 3 ‐ Properly Use and Conserve Natural Resources Providing connections between existing trails, or closes a gap within an existing trail system. Develop structured and coordinated planning methods, Building trails that access open, spaces or provide access to networking opportunities, and advocacy efforts for outdoor remote areas (parks, forests, game lands, etc.). recreation issues, resources, and management to better serve Providing convenient trailheads and access points. all providers. Develop a dynamic, comprehensive inventory of all outdoor recreation amenities, including federal, state, and local trails and facilities, using GIS to identify areas lacking access to public parks. Expand the SCORP inventory of outdoor recreation resources and other GIS databases to identify lands suitable for conservation. Identify and prioritize key lands for acquisition that will conserve natural areas, expand, and enhance the current State Park system. Identify and prioritize key lands for acquisition that will conserve natural areas, particularly in the fastest growing areas of the state. Increase/improve communication/collaboration between providers and partners. Increase education/knowledge of the benefits /values of outdoor recreation in terms of human character and health. Critical Ingredients for Success
Priority 4 – Develop a Statewide Trail Network That Commitment Facilitates Recreation, Transportation and Healthy Lifestyles Engage in collaboration among agencies with common missions to develop the synergy needed for all New Mexicans to have access to
quality outdoor recreation resources that meet their needs. Support the ongoing legislation to update the State Trails Act into a comprehensive mandate for trails. Key strategies include: Providing trails that connect neighborhoods, schools, shopping • Pursue and support the ongoing legislation to update the State areas, and workplaces within communities. Trails Act into a comprehensive mandate for establishing and funding trails in New Mexico.
76 State of New Mexico
• Pursue Outdoor Recreation Partnerships to strengthen Key strategies include: implementation of the priorities from SCORP. • Work with the Governor’s Office, state legislative leaders, and • Enhance ENMRD SPD efforts to provide statewide recreation other funding agencies to maximize existing funds and develop research, planning, and technical assistance services. new funding resources that support state and local recreation • Explore alternative funding sources, ways to improve service land acquisition, conservation and development, rehabilitation, delivery, and means to maximize the benefits that outdoor and maintenance projects. recreation has on local communities. • Pursue full permanent funding for NMSA1978, 16‐1‐2, State Supplemental Land and Water Conservation Fund. Education • Pursue permanent funding through reauthorizing, updating the Pursue cooperation and collaborations to share tools and resources Laws 1973, Chapter 372; NMSA1978, 16‐3‐1, State Trails System to conserve recreation lands and provide high quality opportunities Act to include creation of Section 8, State Trails System Fund. for all. By heightening the awareness of recreation’s benefits for • Create and sustain partnerships to minimize reliance on tax community health and livability, economic vitality, and conservation revenues to support the operation and maintenance of public of our natural resources, we will elevate the priority of outdoor parks and outdoor recreation areas. recreation with policymakers, planners, practitioners, partners, and • Advocate for the continuation of state and local funding the public. assistance through the Land and Water Conservation Fund program and other federal programs that support outdoor Key strategies include: recreation opportunities in New Mexico. • Provide balanced interpretation, education, and outdoor recreation programs to expand the knowledge and appreciation of New Mexico’s natural and recreational resources in a manner consistent with the conservation of the resource. • Work with the Public Education Department to advance healthy lifestyles and natural resource conservation in New Mexico’s classrooms.
Funding We must act now to use funds efficiently at all levels of government, leverage with other private and non‐profit investments, and seek consistent funding to guarantee outdoor recreation for current and future generations.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 77
Recommendations and Action Steps Once an adequate dataset is obtained, use analytical methods such as composite values methodology to determine where gaps in The following are the recommendations for this SCORP period along service are occurring in the state for various types of recreation. with specific action steps. Action Step 2 ‐ Reach Out to Sovereign Nations Recommendation 1 ‐ Verify the Inventory Continue to reach out to the Sovereign Nations for participation in A successful outcome of this SCORP is that the inventory database the process. Use the Cabinet Secretary, New Mexico Department of template has been established allowing for GIS mapping statewide. Indian Affairs, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs as leverage for In the future, this will also allow for analysis using composite‐values contact. Continue to educate these providers on the benefits of methodology. The NM SCORP GIS attributes utilized follow the participating in the SCORP. National Recreation and Park Association’s (NRPA) data collection model currently under development for the nation. Additional Action Step 3 – Track Visitor and Participation Statistics amenities should be added such as restroom locations, put‐ins and Encourage agencies to collect and share visitation and participation take‐outs, fishing/river access, caverns, etc., to further aid in the statistics. Include residence of origin for facilities and programs with analysis. a broader catchment or service area as well as other demographic data. Action Step 1 – Complete Inventory Database Continue to reach out to providers in the inventory database Recommendation 2 – Pursue LWCF Projects for through personal contact and follow up to obtain complete, current, and verifiable inventory data. Continue to educate providers on the Smaller Communities benefits of participating in the SCORP. The initial focus should be on The obesity epidemic and healthy aging are critical issues facing completing the records for known providers on the list, especially New Mexicans. In addition, it appears that projects that are “close the state and federal agencies, because they represent the largest to home” may have the greatest statewide appeal. Therefore, area within the state. smaller local projects, trail connections, fishing ponds and river access, restrooms, trailheads, and looped park trails may provide Increase effort to contact local agencies in the dataset that have not the largest community reach and provide additional opportunities responded to the verification request, particularly those with the for healthy and active lifestyles. largest populations as they represent the most people within the state. Secondary efforts should ebe mad to reach Action Step 1 ‐ Promote in Small Communities providers that are not in the inventory, such as Homeowners Continue to market the availability and status of the Land and Associations, schools, and private companies. Water Conservation Funds (LWCF) for projects. Assist agencies, where possible, in obtaining match‐funding resources.
2010 – 2014 SCORP 79
Action Step 2 ‐ Fill Service Gaps Recommendation 4 ‐ Conduct Further Analysis Concentrate immediate LWCF projects where obvious gaps in Several interest areas surfaced as most important in the community service exist, like in the Eastern service areas and where survey. However, further analysis is necessary to determine why the opportunities for partnerships with other providers exist. needs are not being met. Strategic targeted surveys should point to the direction for meeting those needs. Action Step 3 – Coordinate Trail Efforts The obesity epidemic and healthy aging through active lifestyles are Action Step 1 – Address Fishing critical issues facing New Mexicans. Provide a connected statewide Fishing opportunities in rural and urban areas were a priority to trail system. Facilitate discussion and exchange of information most survey respondents in all service areas. Use the State Parks between providers to coordinate trail plans so that trails from and Division of Wildlife’s mailing lists collected through licensing various providers connect to one another and create a linked and permitted users to gain information to answer the following network wherever possible. critical questions:
Recommendation 3 ‐Structure and Coordinate Do people know where to go to fish? At particular locations, is there enough water to fish? Planning At particular locations, is there adequate space to fish or is Develop structured and coordinated planning methods, networking the facility/space at capacity? opportunities, and advocacy efforts for outdoor recreation issues, Is transportation to fishing areas a problem? resources, and management to better serve all providers. Is equipment a problem? Is the cost of a fishing license a problem? Action Step 1 – Participate in Statewide Collaborations Actively participate in the statewide networking effort underway with Choose Outdoors and the USFS. State networks currently exist Action Step 2 – Address Picnicking and Relaxation Areas in places like Colorado as the Colorado Outdoor Recreation Providing picnicking and relaxation areas was important to many Resource Project (CORRP) and in California as the California survey respondents in many service areas. Use local parks and Roundtable on Recreation, Parks, and Tourism (CRRPT). Three new recreation agencies in cities, towns, and counties, as well as state statewide networks are currently being established in New Mexico, and national parks to conduct intercept surveys asking questions Utah, and Wyoming. relating to picnicking and relaxation areas such as: Do people know where to go to picnic and relax? At particular locations, are there enough available shelters or spaces for your group?
80 State of New Mexico
Do people require smaller intimate picnic spaces or large New Mexico Tourism mailing lists collected through licensing and gathering spaces? permitted users to answer the following critical questions: At particular locations, are there adequate support facilities like restrooms, barbeque pits, water, and trash receptacles? Do people know where to go to camp? At particular locations, are these support facilities well At particular locations, are there enough available maintained or in need of repair? campsites? Is transportation to picnicking and relaxation areas a At particular locations, are there adequate support facilities problem? like restrooms, electricity, barbeque pits, water, and trash receptacles? Action Step 3 – Address Hunting At particular locations, are these support facilities well Hunting was also identified as important to New Mexico residents maintained or in need of repair? and vital for the tourism industry. Using the State Parks, National Is transportation to camping areas a problem? Parks Service, Division of Wildlife, and New Mexico Tourism mailing Is equipment a problem? lists collected through licensing and permitted users, the following Is the cost of a campsite a problem? critical questions can be addressed: Recommendation 5 – Address Connecting Children Do people know where to go to hunt? to Nature At particular locations, is there enough available game? Nature deficit disorder and connecting children to nature are critical At particular locations, are there adequate support facilities issues facing New Mexicans. like restrooms, campsites, barbeque pits, water, and trash receptacles? Action Step 1 – Outdoor Education At particular locations, are these support facilities well maintained or in need of repair? Continue to provide outdoor education through the State Parks Is transportation to hunting areas a problem? Education Program in cooperation with the Public Education. Is equipment a problem? Is the cost of a hunting license a problem? Action Step 4 – Address Camping Camping was also identified as important to New Mexico residents and tourists. Use the State Parks, National Parks Service, BLM, and
2010 – 2014 SCORP 81
For more information about this document, please contact:
Federal Grants Manager/Trails Administrator/State Liaison Officer New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department New Mexico State Parks Division P.O Box 1147 Santa Fe, NM 87504‐1147 1‐888‐NMPARKS www.newmexico.gov http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/PRD/Index.htm
GreenPlay, LLC Karon Badalamenti, CPRP, Principal 3050 Industrial Lane, Suite 200, Broomfield, CO 80020 Telephone: 303/439‐8369 www.greenplayllc.com