DOCSLIB.ORG

Linking the 2010 Census to National Park Visitors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Linking the 2010 Census to National Park Visitors National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Linking the 2010 Census to National Park Visitors Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/WASO/NRTR—2014/880 ON THE COVER Visitors at Grand Canyon National Park Photograph by: Jerry J. Vaske Linking the 2010 Census to National Park Visitors Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/WASO/NRTR—2014/880 Jerry J. Vaske Professor Katie M. Lyon Research Assistant Colorado State University Human Dimensions of Natural Resources Forestry Building Fort Collins, CO 80521-1480 June 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Vaske, J. J., and K. M. Lyon. 2014. Linking the 2010 census to national park visitors. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/WASO/NRTR—2014/880. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 909/124861, June 2014 ii Contents Page Figures................................................................................................................................................... vi Tables .................................................................................................................................................... vi Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................viii Methods .......................................................................................................................................viii Results ........................................................................................................................................... ix Project Background .............................................................................................................................. 10 Research Questions ...................................................................................................................... 10 Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Identifying Parks for Inclusion in Study ...................................................................................... 10 Project Variables .......................................................................................................................... 11 National Park Service Designations ........................................................................................ 11 National Park Service Regions ................................................................................................ 12 United States ZIP Codes .......................................................................................................... 13 VSP Variables .............................................................................................................................. 13 Education ................................................................................................................................. 13 Household Income ................................................................................................................... 13 Ethnicity (Hispanic or Latino) ................................................................................................. 13 Race ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Age .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Sources of Information ............................................................................................................ 14 Activities ................................................................................................................................. 14 Results .................................................................................................................................................. 14 Education Level ............................................................................................................................ 14 Education Level by National Park Service Region ................................................................. 15 Education Level by National Park Service Designation ......................................................... 15 iii Contents (continued) Page Household Income ........................................................................................................................ 17 Household Income by National Park Service Region ............................................................. 17 Household Income by National Park Service Designation ..................................................... 18 Ethnicity ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Ethnicity by National Park Service Region ............................................................................. 19 Ethnicity by National Park Service Designation ..................................................................... 19 Race .............................................................................................................................................. 20 Race by National Park Service Region ................................................................................... 20 Race by National Park Services Designation .......................................................................... 21 Age ............................................................................................................................................... 21 Age by National Park Service Region ..................................................................................... 22 Age by National Park Services Designation ........................................................................... 23 Sources of Information ................................................................................................................. 23 Sources of Information by National Park Service Region ...................................................... 24 Sources of Information by National Park Services Designation ............................................. 25 Park Activities .............................................................................................................................. 26 Park activity by National Park Service Region ....................................................................... 27 Park activity by National Park Services Designation .............................................................. 28 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 31 Discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 31 Conceptual Explanations .............................................................................................................. 31 Household Income ................................................................................................................... 31 Ethnicity and Race ................................................................................................................... 32 Age .......................................................................................................................................... 34 Methodological Explanations ......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New
    ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico 1 Esteban Muldavin, Paul Neville, Charlie Jackson, and Teri Neville2 2006 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY To support the management and sustainability of the ecosystems of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP), a map of current vegetation was developed. The map was based on aerial photography from 2000 and Landsat satellite imagery from 1999 and 2001, and was designed to serve natural resources management planning activities at an operational scale of 1:24,000. There are 20 map units distributed among forest, shrubland, grassland, and wetland ecosystems. Each map unit is defined in terms of a vegetation classification that was developed for the preserve based on 348 ground plots. An annotated legend is provided with details of vegetation composition, environment, and distribution of each unit in the preserve. Map sheets at 1:32,000 scale were produced, and a stand-alone geographic information system was constructed to house the digital version of the map. In addition, all supporting field data was compiled into a relational database for use by preserve managers. Cerro La Jarra in Valle Grande of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (Photo: E. Muldavin) 1 Final report submitted in April 4, 2006 in partial fulfillment of National Prak Service Award No. 1443-CA-1248- 01-001 and Valles Caldrea Trust Contract No. VCT-TO 0401. 2 Esteban Muldavin (Senior Ecologist), Charlie Jackson (Mapping Specialist), and Teri Neville (GIS Specialist) are with Natural Heritage New Mexico of the Museum of Southwestern Biology at the University of New Mexico (UNM); Paul Neville is with the Earth Data Analysis Center (EDAC) at UNM.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Park System
    January 2009 Parks and Recreation in the United States The National Park System Margaret Walls BACKGROUNDER 1616 P St. NW Washington, DC 20036 202-328-5000 www.rff.org Resources for the Future Walls Parks and Recreation in the United States: The National Park System Margaret Walls∗ Introduction The National Park Service, a bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior, is responsible for managing 391 sites—including national monuments, national recreation areas, national rivers, national parks, various types of historic sites, and other categories of protected lands—that cover 84 million acres. Some of the sites, such as Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Canyon, are viewed as iconic symbols of America. But the National Park Service also manages a number of small historical sites, military parks, scenic parkways, the National Mall in Washington, DC, and a variety of other protected locations. In this backgrounder, we provide a brief history of the Park Service, show trends in land acreage managed by the bureau and visitation at National Park Service sites over time, show funding trends, and present the challenges and issues facing the Park Service today. History National parks were created before there was a National Park Service. President Ulysses S. Grant first set aside land for a “public park” in 1872 with the founding of Yellowstone. Yosemite, General Grant (now part of Kings Canyon), and Sequoia National Parks in California were created in 1890, and nine years later Mount Rainier National Park was set aside in Washington. With passage of the Antiquities Act in 1906, the President was granted authority to declare historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and sites of scientific interest as national monuments.
    [Show full text]
  • 417 US National Parks, Historical Sites, Preserves, Seashores and More!
    417 US National Parks, Historical Sites, Preserves, Seashores and more! Alabama o Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument o Freedom Riders National Monument o Horseshoe Bend National Military Park o Little River Canyon National Preserve o Russell Cave National Monument o Tuskegee Airmen National Historic Site o Tuskegee Institute National Historic Site Alaska o Alagnak Wild River o Aniakchak National Monument o Aniakchak National Preserve o Bering Land Bridge National Preserve o Cape Krusenstern National Monument o Denali National Park o Denali National Preserve o Gates of the Arctic National Park o Gates of the Arctic National Preserve o Glacier Bay National Park o Glacier Bay National Preserve o Katmai National Park o Katmai National Preserve o Kenai Fjords National Park o Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (also Washington) o Kobuk Valley National Park o Lake Clark National Park o Lake Clark National Preserve o Noatak National Preserve o Sitka National Historical Park o World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument (also California, Hawaii) o Wrangell-St. Elias National Park o Wrangell-St. Elias National Preserve o Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve Courtesy of ParkRangerJohn.com Arizona o Canyon De Chelly National Monument o Casa Grande Ruins National Monument o Chiricahua National Monument o Coronado National Memorial o Fort Bowie National Historic Site o Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (also Utah) o Grand Canyon National Park o Hohokam Pima National Monument o Hubbel Trading Post National Historic Site
    [Show full text]
  • Mojave National Preserve California
    A fact sheet from 2017 Dougall Photography/iStockphoto Mojave’s $131.8 million maintenance backlog includes repairs to historic buildings such as the Kelso Depot. Shane McMurphy/iStockphoto Mojave National Preserve California Overview Two hours from the hustle and bustle of Las Vegas and 100 miles from the nearest lodging lies California’s Mojave National Preserve. The Las Vegas Review-Journal dubbed this vast desert in San Bernardino County the “perfect escape for those seeking serenity.” The preserve spans 1.6 million acres, making it the third-largest National Park Service (NPS) unit in the contiguous United States. Mojave is ecologically and geologically diverse, with towering sand dunes, dun-colored mesas, and volcanic formations providing habitat for its abundant plants and wildlife. In addition to the densest forest of Joshua trees in the world, visitors can see bighorn sheep, bobcats, golden eagles, and breathtaking displays of seasonal wildflowers. The preserve also has a rich cultural heritage. Lands first inhabited by the Chemehuevi and Mojave tribes attracted gold miners in the late 19th century and were later crossed by several railroad lines. Visitors can learn more about this history through exhibits at the visitor center and by exploring archaeological sites, abandoned mines, and preserved homesteads and other buildings. The ghost town of Kelso, which once served as a Union Pacific Railroad depot and mining outpost, is one of the park’s most popular destinations. Unfortunately, Mojave faces over $131 million in deferred maintenance. Maintenance challenges Nearly all of Mojave’s needed repairs are for its road network. Severe deterioration of some sections of pavement has prompted the NPS to warn visitors of dangerous potholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Bandelier National Monument Executive Summary & Final Report
    NPS Greening Charrette -- Bandelier National Monument Executive Summary & Final Report This report is a summary of the NPS Bandelier Greening Charrette Conducted in Santa Fe, New Mexico on April 8-10, 2003 Funding and coordination provided by: U.S Environmental Protection Agency National Park Service Bandelier National Monument Final Report prepared by: Joel A. Todd and Gail A. Lindsey, FAIA 1 Bandelier National Monument Greening Charrette April 8-10, 2003 Santa Fe, New Mexico Executive Summary Bandelier National Monument is located northwest of Santa Fe, New Mexico. It contains cliff dwellings and other structures built by Puebloan ancestors as well as more recent buildings constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s. In addition, there are almost 33,000 acres of wilderness, served by only three miles of public road and 70 miles of trails. The park has already taken steps to “green” its operations, but important issues remain. These include crowded parking lots and lines of cars waiting to enter the park, maintenance and updating of the historic CCC buildings including the Visitor Center, renovation of the snack bar and renegotiation of the concessions contract, and construction of a new maintenance facility at the current “boneyard.” This workshop and charrette was the third in a series co- sponsored by the National Park Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Participants included the Bandelier Superintendent and staff as well as personnel from other national parks, state parks, and experts from around the country. The day before the event, there was a tour of the park, designed to introduce participants to issues at Bandelier.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data
    Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data By Carl J. Markon and Sara Wesser Open-File Report 00-51 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey LAND COVER MAPPING OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NORTHWEST ALASKA MANAGEMENT AREA USING LANDSAT MULTISPECTRAL AND THEMATIC MAPPER SATELLITE DATA By Carl J. Markon1 and Sara Wesser2 1 Raytheon SIX Corp., USGS EROS Alaska Field Office, 4230 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508-4664. E-mail: [email protected]. Work conducted under contract #1434-CR-97-40274 2National Park Service, 2525 Gambell St., Anchorage, AK 99503-2892 Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral Scanner and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data ABSTRACT A land cover map of the National Park Service northwest Alaska management area was produced using digitally processed Landsat data. These and other environmental data were incorporated into a geographic information system to provide baseline information about the nature and extent of resources present in this northwest Alaskan environment. This report details the methodology, depicts vegetation profiles of the surrounding landscape, and describes the different vegetation types mapped. Portions of nine Landsat satellite (multispectral scanner and thematic mapper) scenes were used to produce a land cover map of the Cape Krusenstern National Monument and Noatak National Preserve and to update an existing land cover map of Kobuk Valley National Park Valley National Park. A Bayesian multivariate classifier was applied to the multispectral data sets, followed by the application of ancillary data (elevation, slope, aspect, soils, watersheds, and geology) to enhance the spectral separation of classes into more meaningful vegetation types.
    [Show full text]
  • Castle Clinton Foundation Document
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Castle Clinton National Monument New York September 2018 Foundation Document Robert F Whitehall St Wagner Jr Beaver St Battery P t Park l S am illi Castle Clinton S W National Monument Stone St Bridge St Pearl St State St Water St Broad St Battery Upper Bay South St §¨¦478 Battery Whitehall Maritime Terminal Building Manhattan North 0 250 500 Á Feet Castle Clinton National Monument Contents Mission of the National Park Service 1 Introduction 2 Part 1: Core Components 3 Brief Description of the Park 3 Park Purpose 4 Park Significance 5 Fundamental Resources and Values 6 Related Resources 7 Interpretive Themes 8 Part 2: Dynamic Components 9 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments 9 Assessment of Planning and Data Needs 9 Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values 9 Identification of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs 15 Planning and Data Needs 16 Part 3: Contributors 19 Castle Clinton National Monument 19 NPS Northeast Region 19 Other NPS Staff 19 Partners 19 Appendixes 20 Appendix A: Enabling Legislation and Legislative Acts for Castle Clinton National Monument 20 Appendix B: Inventory of Administrative Commitments 22 Foundation Document Castle Clinton National Monument Mission of the National Park Service The National Park Service (NPS) preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Hovenweep National Monument, General Management Plan/EA
    National Park Service National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior Hovenweep National Monument Hovenweep National Monument Colorado • Utah Colorado • Utah Hovenweep NationalHovenweep Monument Environmental Assessment Environmental General Management Plan May GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Cover photo: Hovenweep Castle General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment Hovenweep National Monument Montezuma County, Colorado, and San Juan County, Utah _______________________________________________________________________ Hovenweep National Monument was established by presidential proclamation on March 2, 1923 (Presidential Proclamation 1654 42 Stat. 2299). There is currently no approved general management plan for the monument. The purpose of the general management plan is to establish a comprehensive vision of the monument’s purpose, significance, and resource goals. The plan will also define the management strategies for protecting the monument’s resources, providing for public understanding and enjoyment, ensuring organizational effectiveness, and promoting partnership opportunities that will support and complement all aspects of park management. The plan will help monument staff guide programs and set priorities for resource stewardship, visitor use and experience, partnerships, facilities, and operations at Hovenweep National Monument. The National Park Service developed a draft general management plan and environmental assessment for Hovenweep in the mid-1980s and released a draft in 1988. The draft plan proposed a resource protection zone encompassing Bureau of Land Management lands with nationally significant cultural resources surrounding the Hovenweep units and a cooperative management strategy to protect these resources. The 1988 draft plan was never finalized. This document examines two alternatives for managing Hovenweep National Monument for the next 15 to 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson Plan, Under Additional Notes
    National Park Service Dinosaur U.S. Department of the Interior Dinosaur National Monument The Arrowhead: Symbol of the National Park Service Grade level: 4th Grade Time spent: 30 minutes Curriculum standards: Every Kid in a Park (https://everykidoutdoors.gov/index.htm) Mental Map/Outline: 1. Introduction- Explain logos and what they mean. 2. Topic 1- The National Park Service logo is an arrowhead. Explain the arrowhead’s five elements that represent the National Park Service Mission. 3. Activity- Draw your own logo/symbol to help represent the National Park Service and their mission. Props & Supplies: Pictures included. Photos: Attached at end of lesson plan, under additional notes. All photos show resources found in Dinosaur National Monument that embody the elements of the arrowhead. Photos could be changed to meet resources found in other National Park units. Program Theme: How can a symbol teach us about what it represents? Introduction: Q: To be asked by the teacher/ranger to students. Begin activity by asking questions surrounding logos/symbols to get class in the correct mindset for thinking of a logo/symbol and how it represents an organization! Q: Ask students what are some company logos you know? (Apple, Nike, etc.) Q: What are those companies’ actual logos? (Apple, Swoosh, etc.) National Park Service Dinosaur U.S. Department of the Interior Dinosaur National Monument Q: What do the logos for these companies represent? (Greek God of Victory, etc.) Explain that each logo has thought behind it and it represents more than the company name. Explain how the National Park Service (NPS) is similar with their logo.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Florida's National Parks
    Climate Change and Florida’s National Parks Florida is among the most climate change-threatened states in the United States. Florida’s treasured national parks—spanning the Greater Everglades ecosystem northward into Gulf Islands National Seashore and beyond—are being impacted by our changing climate. Climate change is the greatest threat science-based policies that enhance the Florida’s economy. NPCA’s Sun Coast America’s national parks have ever faced. resilience of our incredible system of region is systematically assessing, through Nearly everything we know and love about national parks. With Florida’s low elevation, research and analysis, the most serious the parks—their plants and animals, rivers national park sites in the state are especially climate impacts threatening national and lakes, beaches, historic structures, susceptible to the threats associated with park landscapes. This regional climate and more—is already under stress from climate change. Sea level rise, changing dispatch thus serves a twofold purpose: to our changing climate. As America’s ocean conditions, and shifting weather shine a light on climate case studies across leading voice for our national parks, patterns are impacting our landscapes. iconic Floridian places, and to share what National Parks Conservation Association All of these climate impacts converge to NPCA’s Sun Coast team is doing to help (NPCA) is at the forefront of efforts to present unprecedented challenges to park address and adapt to climate threats to address climate impacts and promote management, preservation, tourism, and our treasured national park ecosystems. Above: Florida Bay in Everglades National Park ©South Florida Water Management District NATIONAL PARK Rising Sea Levels Threaten THREAT Biodiversity & Cultural Resources While all national park units in Florida Importance, Everglades National Park are threatened by sea level rise, some protects an abundance of biodiversity parks are more vulnerable than others.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiricahua National Monument Historic Designed Landscape Historic Name
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being nominated, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property Chiricahua National Monument Historic Designed Landscape historic name other name/site number Wonderland of Rocks; Rhyolite Park; The Pinnacles; Say Yahdesut “Point of Rocks” 2. Location street & number: Chiricahua National Monument (CHIR) 12856 E. Rhyolite Canyon Road _____not for publication city/town: Willcox___________________________________________________________ _X_ vicinity state: Arizona_____ code: AZ __________ county: Cochise_________ code: 003_____ zip code: 85643___ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this ¨ nomination ¨ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places an meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property ¨ meets ¨ does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • National Park Service: FY2021 Appropriations
    Updated January 26, 2021 National Park Service: FY2021 Appropriations The National Park Service (NPS) administers the National fiscal year, several continuing resolutions provided funding Park System, which includes 423 units valued for their at FY2020 levels before enactment of P.L. 116-260. natural, cultural, and recreational importance. System lands cover 81 million federal acres and 4 million nonfederal NPS also receives mandatory appropriations. NPS’s budget acres. As part of the Department of the Interior, NPS justification estimated $0.749 billion in mandatory receives funding in annual appropriations laws for Interior, appropriations for FY2021, a 1% increase over estimated Environment, and Related Agencies. Selected issues for NPS mandatory funding for FY2020. These mandatory Congress include the total level of NPS appropriations, appropriations come from entrance and recreation fees, funding to address NPS’s backlog of deferred maintenance concessioner fees, donations, and other sources. In August (DM), and funds for NPS assistance to nonfederal entities. 2020, the GAOA established additional mandatory spending for NPS, including a fund to address agency DM FY2021 Appropriations needs. The GAOA also designated as mandatory spending The Trump Administration requested $2.793 billion in agency funding from the Land and Water Conservation FY2021 discretionary appropriations for NPS. This amount Fund (LWCF; 54 U.S.C. §200301), previously provided was 17% less than NPS’s FY2020 appropriation of $3.377 through discretionary appropriations. billion, enacted in P.L. 116-94. The request included reductions for all NPS accounts as compared with FY2020. NPS’s Appropriations Accounts NPS has six discretionary appropriations accounts. P.L. 116-260, enacted on December 27, 2020, contained However, in FY2021, one account—Land Acquisition and $3.123 billion for NPS, 8% less than the FY2020 regular State Assistance—did not receive discretionary appropriation and 12% more than requested by the appropriations (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]