Clues from Recreation Trends

Ken Cordell grew up in the mountains of North Carolina. The first thing he did after school and chores was head off into the woods, either alone or with friends. Now an SRS pioneering scientist studying changes in the values people place on forests, Cordell is still an avid hiker and birdwatcher, continuing to carve out time from his busy career for precious hours in the wild.

As a new graduate student in forestry at North Carolina State University, Cordell expressed an interest in studying forest conservation. Lacking this opportunity, Cordell found himself studying outdoor recreation instead. Thus began his career-long interest in outdoor recreation and its relationship to natural resource values, planning, and management. Cordell started surveying recreational trends almost four decades ago when the National Recreation Survey was first mandated by the U.S. Congress; the research group he leads in Athens, GA, has been involved in the survey since the 1980s. Since the mid-1990s, Cordell and his colleagues have been documenting national trends in outdoor recreation participation through the expanded National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE). The largest survey of its kind ever conducted, the NSRE not only identifies trends in outdoor activities, but also surveys perceptions and opinions, allowing a look into how America and the South are changing demographically— and how different groups use and value natural resources. “After World War II, outdoor recreation started to become a major part of the American lifestyle,” says Cordell. “The family vacation and summer trips became a significant part of the typical American’s calendar.” Recognizing a growing demand, the Federal government started studying recreation in the late 1950s and early 1960s; findings from these early studies set off legislative changes that ultimately resulted in Congressional acts that created the wilderness, water, and hiking resources that millions of people use every day.

In 1960, the recreation survey identified the most popular outdoor activities as (in order) driving for pleasure, swimming, walking, playing outdoor games or sports, sightseeing, picnicking, fishing, bicycling, attending outdoor sports events, boating, nature walks, and hunting. Recreation surveys in the 1980s found many of the same activities, but by 2000, when results from the expanded NSRE started to come in, recreation priorities for Americans had changed.

“In recent years, one of the most outstanding trends we’ve seen in outdoor recreation is a very strong change in what people choose to do,” says Cordell. “More and more people are showing an interest in viewing, photographing, and learning about nature. One of the lead activities is birdwatching. That’s a big change.”

And more people than ever are outdoors. The NSRE found that between 2000 and 2007, the total number of people who participated in one or more outdoor activities grew by 4.4 percent, from an estimated 208 to 217 million. At the same time, the total number of days of participation increased by approximately 25 percent. Among activities, viewing, photographing, and studying nature showed strong growth. “Our research suggests that Americans’ interest in nature and nature-based recreation, though changing is not declining; rather, it is strong and growing,” says Cordell. “The increase in observation and study of nature is, in my view, a very healthy trend that apparently reflects rising and widespread interest in the future of natural resources, conservation, and public lands.”

New Folks in the South

For most of the four decades of recreation studies, the typical outdoor recreation participant has been white, male, able bodied, well educated, and earning above average income—but that demographic is definitely changing. In the South, population numbers for Hispanics are rapidly rising, and more Asian Americans are making the South their home. African-Americans, whose population is also increasing in the South, are participating in more outdoor activities than they have in previous generations. All of these population shifts—and those of the future—will affect how natural resources are managed in the South.

Research social scientist Cassandra Johnson grew up in urban Atlanta, where she recalls that no one in her neighborhood really went outdoors much. Johnson visited local parks with her friends, but had never visited a national forest until she began working with the Forest Service. Now based in Athens, GA, Johnson focuses part of her research for the SRS Integrating Human and Natural Systems unit on why, even in today’s greening society, such a low percentage of African-Americans participate in nature-based outdoor recreation.

In one national study, Johnson found that only 2 to 3 percent of African- Americans in the South participate in outdoor recreation, compared to 20 to 25 percent of Hispanics in California. “Why do southern African-Americans not participate in population proportions at least equal to Hispanics?” asks Johnson. “Both populations have a long history in their respective regions, and each minority group is visible and prominent. When they do recreate, both tend to participate in large extended groups of family and friends. Why, then, is there such a disparity between the two groups?”

One possible explanation may be rooted in the Forest Service itself, in differences in approaches to recreation and planning management, facility design, and communication strategies between the two regions. Johnson has just started a study of outdoor recreation management policies to identify possible disparities. But what if it’s more about where you live than what ethnic group you belong to or how the forests near you are managed?

How Far to the Nearest Forest?

Mike Bowker, also a research social scientist in the SRS Athens unit, came to the Forest Service in the mid- 1990s as a trained economist. Until he started working with Cordell, he had never had the occasion to study outdoor recreation economics. He applied what he knew from working in agricultural economics to this new area and has never looked back, expanding his work into this interesting question of minority participation in outdoor recreation.

Johnson and Bowker started looking at the relationship between access to recreational areas and minority status. Bowker, examining participation nationwide, notes that minorities do not generally live close to wildland recreation opportunities. Could lower participation rates be partially explained by location? Or can it be that the studies are skewed in some way?

“In the rural Black Belt region of the South, however, a large minority population does live in close proximity to undeveloped forest land,” says Johnson. “Because African-American land ownership is relatively high in the Black Belt, could it be that African-American landowners use their own forest land for outdoor recreation that isn’t documented in recreation studies?”

Bowker further notes that once a minority group member takes the first step to become involved in outdoor recreation, they usually continue participating. Race and ethnicity may be factors in constraining that first step, but they do not seem to constrain further participation.

Cordell, Johnson, and Bowker all stress that access to opportunities is critical to participation in outdoor recreation. “This can be as simple as where you live,” says Bowker. “If opportunities are not close to one’s home, then outdoor recreation participation will be lower.” In the West, for example, whites, who have the highest levels of outdoor recreation participation, tend to live closer to national parks and forests than minorities.

Johnson’s research about the attitudes and activities of urban minorities also shows that access is critical to both awareness and participation. “Opportunities to engage in outdoor recreation might add a different dimension to the lives of urban minorities,”

Johnson says. “Unfortunately, many urban minorities are not aware of the potential of wildland outdoor recreation to alleviate the effects of social ills.” Johnson also notes that a history of siting often noxious industries near minority communities has made positive association with nature difficult. She recently completed a study of Newton, GA, a community where decades of industrial pollution have made it unsafe for residents to grow gardens or spend much time outdoors. “

This is an extreme if not uncommon example of how access can affect outdoor recreation participation,” says Johnson. “If children can’t safely play outdoors, how will they ever develop positive attitudes toward nature, and how will they ever become outdoor recreation participants?”

How Far to the Nearest Forest?

From a national perspective, Cordell underscores the important role of management in maintaining and improving outdoor recreation access. In recent decades, a plethora of new and specialized—sometimes extreme—outdoor activities have emerged. Activities such as rock climbing and snowboarding get a lot of coverage in outdoor magazines but are of intense interest to a relatively small number of participants. Because of safety and other issues, these activities often capture the attention of natural resource managers.

Cordell notes, however, that over the decades the majority of people, regardless of race and ethnicity, prefer a stable core of outdoor recreation activities that include walking, picnicking, swimming, riding bicycles, and viewing and learning about nature. “These activities are some of the easiest and least expensive to provide,” says Cordell. “They also better address the needs of families, of an aging population, and of participants who are less able to engage in physically demanding activities. Access to these types of activities should remain a priority with natural resource managers.”

User fees are another hotly debated issue for natural resource managers. Some feel that fees further restrict the access of citizens less able to pay, while others argue that user fees are low enough and provide needed funds for site maintenance. Bowker’s research has uncovered two interesting twists to this debate. He found that users are willing to pay for outdoor recreation opportunities as long as they feel they are getting value for their money. Bowker’s studies have also shown that minorities are less supportive of user fees. “In a study of recreation on the Florida Keys, we found that raising fees disproportionately reduced nonwhite visitation,” says Bowker. “Managers should be aware of the disproportional impacts of user fees and other access-related issues.”

Providing accessible information may be as important as providing physical access. Good communication is crucial to serving the outdoor recreation needs of citizens, regardless of race or ethnicity. “People are overwhelmed by choices,” says Bowker. “Providing good information about what is available and possible will help people make better choices about their nature-based activities.”

SRS Greatest Good for the 21st Century: A Program for Pioneering Research on Changing Forest Values in the South and Nation unit: www.srs.fs.usda.gov/trends/ SRS Integrating Human and Natural Systems unit: www.humanandnaturalsystems.org/

For more information:

Ken Cordell at 706–559–4263 or kcordell@fs.fed.us
Cassandra Johnson at 706–559–4270 or cjohnson09@fs.fed.us
Mike Bowker at 706–559–4271 or mbowker@fs.fed.us

Recommended reading:

Cordell, H.K. 2008. The latest on trends in nature-based outdoor recreation. Forest History Today. (Spring): 4–10.

Cordell, H.K.; Betz, C.J.; Green, G.T. 2008. Nature-based outdoor recreation trends and wilderness. International Journal of Wilderness. 14(2): 7–13.

Green, G.T.; Bowker, J.M.; Johnson, C.Y. [and others]. 2007. An examination of constraints to wilderness visitation. Journal of Wilderness. 13(12): 1–12.

Johnson, C.Y.; Bowker, J.M.; Bergstrom, J.C.; Cordell, H.K. 2004. Wilderness values in America: does immigrant status or ethnicity matter? Society and Natural Resources. 17: 611–628.

Accessibility | Important Notices | Privacy Policy Comments & Suggestions