Despite the widespread agreement on the importance of preserving ecological integrity in conservation and outdoor recreation decision-making processes, traditional metrics analyzing the supply of and demand for conservation and recreation resources have focused on geographical and population-centric units of measurement rather than ecological ones. One tool past researchers have used to inform recreation resource planning is the recreation location quotient (RLQ). While simple park-to-population ratios or acres-per-capita metrics provide a base measure of carrying capacity and are often useful to set broad recreation supply standards, the RLQ offers a more nuanced snapshot of supply and demand by comparing regional ratios to a standardized reference region. The RLQ is thus able to provide a statistic or quotient that highlights regions where recreation resources are particularly abundant and/or scarce relative to a reference area. This project expands the past RLQ analyses by investigating the distribution of recreation resources across the 10 ecological sections found within the US state of Minnesota. RLQs were calculated using recreation trail mileage, natural resource and recreation area acreage data, and recreation facility data from federal, state, and local agencies. Results found notable differences in supply of recreation resources across ecological sections. Some sections were considerably underrepresented in recreation resources-per area (e.g., Red River Valley and North Central Glaciated Plains) while others were underrepresented in recreation resources-per capita (e.g., Minnesota and Northeast Iowa Morainal). The RLQ statistics and resulting maps illustrating relative surplus or deficiencies can inform future land acquisition decisions and highlight the need for cross-jurisdictional planning in order to ensure outdoor recreation systems are ecologically representative. Possible implications and recommendations for future planning decisions are discussed.
References
[1]
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Natonal Forest System Land Management PlanningProposed Rule. 36 CFR Part 219. Fed. Regist. 2011, 76, 8480–8528.
[2]
Minnesota Statewide Conservation and Preservation Plan; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2008.
[3]
Grumbine, R.E. What is ecosystem Management? Conserv. Biol. 1994, 8, 27–38.
[4]
Grumbine, R.E. Reflections on “What is ecosystem management?”. Conserv. Biol. 1997, 11, 41–47.
[5]
Clawson, M.; Knetsch, J.L. Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Published for Resources for the Future; Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1966.
[6]
Clawson, M. Effective acreage for outdoor recreation. Resour. Future 1984, 78, 41–47.
[7]
Harrington, W. Measuring Recreation Supply. Published for Resources for the Future; Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1987.
[8]
Marcouiller, D.W.; Prey, J.; Scott, I. The regional supply of outdoor recreation resources: Demonstrating the use of location quotients as a management tool. J. Park Recreat. Adm. 2009, 27, 92–107.
[9]
McCool, S.F.; Patterson, M.E. Trends in recreation, tourism, and protected area planning. In Trends in Outdoor Recreation, Leisure, and Tourism; Gartner, W.C., Lime, D.W., Eds.; CABI Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2000; pp. 111–119.
[10]
Butler, G.D. Introduction to Community Recreation, 4th ed. ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1967.
[11]
Mertes, J.D.; Hall, J.R. Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidlines; National Recreation and Park Association: Arlington, VA, USA, 1995.
[12]
State of Florida. Outdoor Recreation in Florida—2008: Florida's Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan; Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Recreation and Parks: Tallahassee, FL, USA, 2008.
[13]
State of Indiana. Indiana Statewide Recreation Plan 2006–2010; Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Outdoor Recreation: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 2007.
[14]
State of Missouri. Missouri Revised Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan; Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of State Parks: Jefferson City, MO, USA, 2008.
[15]
Betz, C.J.; English, D.B.K.; Cordell, H.K. Outdoor recreation resources. In Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends; Cordell, H.K., McKinney, S.M., Eds.; Sagamore Publishing: Champaign, IL, USA, 1999; pp. 39–182.
[16]
Walls, M.; Darley, S.; Siikam？ki, J. The State of the Great Outdoors: America's Parks, Public Lands, and Recreation Resources; Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
[17]
Woodall, C.W.; Miles, P.D. Reaching a forest land per capita milestone in the United States. Environmentalist 2008, 28, 215–217.
[18]
English, D.B.K.; Cordell, H.K. Effective Recreation Opportunity Set (EROS) Index: A Computable Measure of Recreation Supply; US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: Asheville, NC, USA, 1993.
[19]
English, D.B.K.; Betz, C.J.; Young, J.M.; Bergstrom, J.C.; Cordell, H.K. Regional Demand and Supply Projections for Outdoor Recreation; US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1993.
[20]
Marcouiller, D.W.; Prey, J. The tourism supply linkage: Recreational sites and their related natural amenities. J. Reg. Anal. Policy 2005, 35, 23–35.
[21]
Edwards, M.B.; Jilcott, S.B.; Floyd, M.F.; Moore, J.B. County-level disparities in access to recreational resources and associations with adult obesity. J. Park Recreat. Adm. 2011, 29, 39–54.
[22]
Rosenberger, R.S.; Bergerson, T.R.; Kline, J.D. Macro-linkages between health and outdoor recreation: The role of parks and recreation providers. J. Park Recreat. Adm. 2009, 27, 8–20.
[23]
Pouta, E.; Siev？nen, T.; Heikkil？, M. National outdoor recreation demand and supply in Finland: An assessment project. Forestry 2000, 73, 103–105.
[24]
Skov-Peterson, H.; Goossen, M. Recreation supply inventories. In Forest Recreation Monitoring: A European Perspective; Siev？nen, T., Arnberger, A., Dehez, J., Grant, N., Jensen, F.S., Skov-Peterson, H., Eds.; Finnish Forest Research Institute: Helsinki, Finland, 2008; pp. 58–69.
[25]
Meyer, R.W. Everyone's Country Estate; Minnesota Historical Society Press: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1991.
[26]
Constitution of the State of Minnesota; Minnesota State Legislature: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2008. Article 9, Section 15.
[27]
Outdoor Recreation Act of 1975; Minnesota State Legislature: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1975. Chapter 353, Section 2, Subdivision 3.
[28]
Orning, G.; Wietecki, M. Regional Parks for Minnesota's Outstate Urban Complexes; University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2007.
[29]
Minnesota Milestones; Minnesota Department of Administration: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2011. Available online: http://server.admin.state.mn.us/mm/goal.html (accessed on 4 November 2011).
[30]
Personal Communication; Minesota's Parks and Trails Legacy Plan Project Steering Committee: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2010.
[31]
Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources. Greater Minnesota Park Inventory Regional Park Criteria: Final Report; Minnesota State Legislature: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2005.
[32]
2010 Regional Parks List; Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2010.
[33]
Parks and Trails Legacy Grant Program: 2009 Funded Grants; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2009.
[34]
Parks and Trails Legacy Grant Program: 2010 Funded Grants; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2010.
[35]
Cleland, D.T.; Avers, P.E.; McNab, W.H.; Jensen, M.E.; Bailey, R.G.; King, T.; Russell, W.E. National hierarchical framework of ecological units. In Ecosystem Management Applications for Sustainable Forest and Wildlife Resources; Boyce, M.A., Haney, A., Eds.; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 1997; pp. 181–200.
[36]
McNab, W.H.; Cleland, D.T.; Freeouf, J.A.; Keys, J.; Nowacki, G.J.; Carpenter, C.A. Description of Ecological Subregions: Sections of the Coterminous United States [CD-ROM]; US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2007.
[37]
Freysinger, V.J.; Allison, M.T.; Schneider, I.E. Acting our age: The relationship between age and leisure. In Diversity and the Recreation Profession; Ventura Press: State College, PA, USA, 2008; pp. 143–162.
[38]
Henderson, K.A.; Bialeschki, M.D. Gender issues and recreation management. In Diversity and the Recreation Profession; Allison, M.T., Schneider, I.E., Eds.; Ventura Press: State College, PA, USA, 2008; pp. 65–92.
[39]
Arnold, M.L.; Shinew, K.J. The role of gender, race, and income on park use constraints. J. Park Recreat. Adm. 1998, 16, 39–56.
[40]
Gómez, E. Race, ethnicity, recreation, and leisure: An assessment of research gaps. In Recreation Visitor Research: Studies of Diversity; Chavez, D.J., Winter, P.L., Absher, J.D., Eds.;. General Technical Report US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: Albany, CA, USA, 2008; pp. 75–84.
[41]
Floyd, M.F.; Bocarro, J.N.; Thompson, T.D. Research on race and ethnicity in leisure studies: A review of five major journals. J. Leis. Res. 2008, 40, 1–22.
[42]
Gentin, S. Outdoor recreation and ethnicity in Europe—A review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2011, 10, 153–161.
[43]
Land Management Information Center—Minnesota Land Ownership; Minnesota Geospatial Information Office: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2011. Available online: http://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/land_own.html#state (accessed on 4 November 2011).
[44]
United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics 2010; United States Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[45]
McGranahan, D. USDA Economic Research Service ERS/USDA Data—Natural Amenities Scale; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/NaturalAmenities/ (accessed on 8 November 2011).
[46]
Crandell, G. Nature Pictorialized: “The View” in Landscape History; Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1993.
[47]
Gobster, P.H. An ecological aesthetic for forest landscape management. Landscape J. 1999, 18, 54–64.
[48]
Gobster, P.H.; Nassauer, J.I.; Daniel, T.C.; Fry, G. The shared landscape: What does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landscape Ecol. 2007, 22, 959–972.
[49]
Gobster, P.H. Yellowstone hotspot. Landscape J. 2008, 27, 291–308.
[50]
Ribe, R.G. Scenic beauty perceptions along the ROS. J. Environ. Manag. 1994, 42, 199–221.
[51]
McKinney, M.; Essington, K. Learning to think and act like a region. Land Lines 2006, 18, 8–13.
[52]
McKinney, M.; Parr, J.; Seitzer, E. Working across boundaries: A framework for regional collaboration. Land Lines 2004, 16, 5–8.
[53]
Statutes and Regulations; International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources: Gland, Switzerland, 2011.
[54]
Stevens, W.K. Miracle Under the Oaks: The Revival of Nature in America; Pocket Books: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
[55]
Hill, D.; Daniel, T.C. Foundations for an ecological aesthetic: Can information alter landscape preferences? Soc. Nat. Resour. 2007, 21, 34–49.
[56]
Mann, C.; Pouta, E.; Gentin, S.; Jensen, F.S. Outdoor recreation in forest policy and legislation: A European comparison. Urban For. Urban Green. 2010, 9, 303–312.
