This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp (Funding for document digitization was provided, in part, by a grant from the Minnesota Historical & Cultural Heritage Program.) CONTENTS GE~EEAL CONCLUSION 1 INTROPUC TION. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 . REQIONAL ANALYSIS o o • o ••••• o o o • o • o • o • o o . o o o o • ,, o . o o o o o o 2 Regional Geography o • o o .. o o o •• o • o o ••.• o o . o •.•. o ••• o ..• 2 Vegetation " o •. o .. o o,, o ••.. o o o o o o o . o o o o o o o •. o •.•• ,, .• o o • 3 General Land Use o o • o o o o o.... o o . o . o o o ... o o o • o o . o o o o o o o 4 Existing Recreational Resources a o o o o o o o . o • o o o o o o • o o • o o o 5 Map: Existing ;md Planned .fublic Recreation Resources Red .Lake~ Region, Minnesota o o 0 0 o•• 5 (Opposite) Proposed Recreational Resources in the Region . o • o 0 • 0 o o o 7 Traffic Patterns o . • o o o o . o o o o o o • . o . • o • • • o o o • . o • • . o 8 Population and_ Economy .• o. o. o o o. o .•.. o ... o o. o .• o o •• o o • . 9 Historical Background - Homesteading o o o o o o o o o • o o o o ••. 10 SITE S.ELECTION 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 State Park Criteria o . o ••. 0 0 • 0 • o •• o •• o ...•• o •• o ••• o o o •. 13 Potential Site Evaluation o o 0 o . 0 0 0 0 o .••• o o . o 0 • o •. o ... o•. 14 Site Analysis . o • o o 0 0 ••• 0 0 • 0 ••••• 0 • o •. o o ...••••...•••. 15 Vegetative Cover·o . o .•••• o o o o o . o o o o o .••. o . o •.....•• o o . 15 Map: Vegetative Cover . 0 ••••• o 0 •••••• o .•. o .•.... o 15 (Opposite) Land Characteristics ..•.•• o • o ... o .• o • o • o •••• o o o o • o ... 16 Map: Land Characteristics o ••••• o . o o o ••••• o • o ••••• 16 (Opposite) Wildlife Resources o .•.•• o. o o •• o . o ••• o •••• ,, ••• o o ••••• o 17 Map: Wildlife ~esources . o o •• 0 o . o ••••• o • o • 0 o ••• o o o 17 (Opposite) Historical Resources • o . 0 •• 0 0 o • o o • 0 • o o " ••••• o o . o .. o o • o o 18 Map: Homesteads and Settlements~ 1900 - J.917 .. o o 18 (Opposite) Prehistoric Cultµre ....•. 0 • o •. o . o • o •••••• o ••••• o o 21 Other Historical Points of Interest o •••..•• 0 o o . o •. o o 21 Map: Red Lake Area Points of Interest o o o o o . o o o o o o o 22 SITE PLAN AND COST ANALYSIS o o o ...•........ o o. o .•.... 23 Preliminary Development Plano . o ..•••.... o o ••••• o • o • . 23 Map: Preliminary Development Site Plan .. 0 ••• o •• 0 • 23 (Opposite) Preliminary Cost Estimate o . o • o .... .,, • o • o o o o o o o o o o o o o. o 27 Individual Campground Site Cost Estimate o • o o o0 •• o o o o o o 0 30 Proposed Development Staging o o o • o ..• 0 0 0 0 0 • o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • o . 3+ Proposed Land Acquisition o ••. o o o o • o o o o o o o . o •••• o o o o o o · 31 Map: Land Ownership o .. o • o 0 o .•. o •• o o o o • o o. o o o o o o • 32 (Opposite) Maintenance and Operation o o o o o o o o o o •. o o o ... o ... o • o • o o • 33 ,., i CONTENTS (continued) RECREATION DEMAND 2 BENEFITS AND REVENUE 34 Recent Trends in Recreation 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 34 Trends in Attendance in Minnesota Sfate Parks 0 o o o o o . 34 Cyclical Attendance Patterns 0 o o o o o o o ~ o o o . o o o o o o . o o o 35 Population o 0 o o o o o o o • o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o'o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 36 Personal Consumption Expenditures 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 37 Leisure Time o • 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 o . 0 . o o o o o o . o . o . o o o . o o . o o o 3 7 Projection of the Economic Impact o o o o o o o o . o . o o o ... o o o o 38 A ttendanc eo o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o o o o . o o • o .. o .. o o o ... o o o o 3 8 Expenditures for Recreation o o... 0 • 0 o o o . o 0 o o 0 oo o o o 39 Projected Economic Benefit 0 0 o o . o o o . 0 . o o o ••• o . 40 Projected Revenue Within the Proposed Park o. o •• o o 40 TABLES L Minnesota State Parks Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. 20 Minnesota State Parks Calendar Year Attendance Data 1959-19650 30 Estimated State Park Attendance~ Estimated Tourist Camper Days, Sticker Receipts. 40 Minnesota State Parks 1965 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 50 Minnesota State Parks 1964 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 60 Minnesota State Parks 1963 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days., 7. Minnesota State Parks 1962 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. 8. Minnesota State Parks 1961 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 9. Minnesota State Parks 1960 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. lOo Minnesota State Parks 1959 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. 11. Minnesota State Parks 1958 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 120 Minnesota State Parks 1957 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 13. Minnesota State Parks 1956 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. 14. Minnesota State Parks 1954 & 1955 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Days. Minn~sota State Parks 195i3 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso Attendance Report for 1952. Minnesota State Parks 1950 & 1951 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso 18. Minnesota State Parks 1949 Calendar Year Attendance Data Visitor Dayso I 19. Estimate of Spending by Tourists, Summer 19660 200 What Tourists Liked Most About Area Summer 19660 2L What Tourists Liked Least About Are:;i, 5 Su.mm er 19 66 0 220 Tourists Principal Reason for Visiting Area 9 Summer 1966. 23. Ages of Persons Visiting Area? Summer 19660 240 Travelers Who Have Visited This Area Beforeo 25. Non-Minnesota Residents Who Have Visited Minnesota Before. 260 Where Tourists Are Staying While in Minnesota 5 Summer 1966" 27. Home States of Tourists in Northern Minnesotay Summer 1966. 28. Home Cities of Minnesota Tourists in Northern Minnesota~ Summer 19 66. 290 Nights Spent in Minnesota by Tourists, Summer 1966. 30. Nights Spent in Area by Tourists, Summer 19660 TABL.ES (continued) 31. Nights Spent Away From Home by Tourists, Summer 1966. 32. Principal Reason for Visiting Minnesota, Summer 1966. 33. Principal Reason for Visiting Minnesota, Summer 1966 (Second Choice). 34. Principal Reason for Visiting Minnesota, Summer 1966 (Third Choice). 35. Summary of Automatic Traffic Recorder Data Average Daily Volume for Sunday, Weekday, Saturday, and Month for the Year 1964. 36. Automatic Traffic Recorder Data 24 Hour Adjusted Average Daily Traffic for the Month Comparied to the Month in the Previous Year. 37. Automatic Traffic Recorder Data Summary of Hourly Volumes for 30 Highest Hours, 1964. Cyclical Attendance Patterns in Minnesota State Parks (page 35). Actual and Projected Population in Minnesota and Selected States in the Upper Midwest - 1950, 1960, 1964, 1980, and 2000 (page 36). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many individuals, organizations and agencies have contributed to this report. The planning. staff is particularly indebted to U. W. Rella, Director~ John Martin and Milton Krona of the Division of State Parks; William Callies and John Parker of the Division of Game and Fish, and to Roger Anderson and Hugo Kornell of the Division of Forestry, Minnesota Department of Conserva­ tion. To the staff of the Minnesota Historical Society, special thanks should go to Russell Fridley, Director and Timothy Fiske, Archeologist. From the Kellier and Waskish communities, we wish to thank Leonard Eggen, Elmer Tuttle, Mrs. Clara Quale and Mrs. Bertha Halvorson, and Mayor Raymer Hoyum of Kelliher. A printed report summarizing the findings and conclusions of this study is available from the Division of State Parks. OCTOBER, 1966 UPPER RED LAKE STATE PARK FEASIBILITY STUDY GENERAL CONCLUSION The proposed Upper Red Lake State Park contains recreation resource values that could make it one of the more outstanding parks in Minnesota. The consultants unhesitantly recommend the Upper Red Lake site for a state park because it: 1) exemplifies the natural landscape, native vegetation and wildlife of a major physiographic division of the state; 2) provides a logical place for interpreting the story of Minnesota homesteading; and 3) contains exceptional opportunities for active water related recreation and other park values.