Sid Stevenson, PhDKansas State University
and Recreation Resources Research Services
Society of Outdoor Recreation ProfessionalsMay, 2013
Recreation and Tourism
Public health
Biodiversity conservation
Energy siting
Flood and water management
Climate adaptation
Public Safety
Wildfire response
Land use planning
Mitigation strategies
and. . .
Currently there are literally thousands of different models, many designed specifically to reach agency or local objectives. These same objectives and many more can be reached if these data are standardized and comprehensive
Recreation and Tourism•
Rec/Park Finders (interactive searching and mapping)•
Mobile apps (e.g. Parks by Nature)•
Improved mapping and directions via national vendors: (e.g. Google, Bing, Nokia, Garmin, MapQuest)
•
Enhanced with user input -
Blend of events and locations•
Spatial comparison of places to people for SCORPSPublic Health•
Better planning (what is needed where) •
Proximity to healthy choices•
Identifying Play Deserts
In neighborhoods without a park or playground, the incidence of childhood obesity increases 29%. In fact, children with a park or playground within half-a-mile are almost five times more likely to be a healthy weight than children without playgrounds or parks nearby.
HHS research (KaBoom)
Number of states with GIS based inventories is increasing but with no consistent format
LWCF leadership sees relevance but does not want to dictate GIS based inventories. Pressure to change needs to come from states, who see the value in standardization.
States are eligible to initiate a GIS inventory via a planning grant, but this approach (while useful) is a step short in the bigger picture of a national model, where the benefits are exponentially greater.
Decent to excellent data at the state and federal level but minimal data, even by commercial vendors, at the city and county level.
In 2007, ESRI data set (ArcGIS) provided by (NavTeq) listed slightly over 800 parks in KS. In actuality, we have over 3,500 and another 1,600 schools we included as park-like properties.
Values and detail being requested is a bit overwhelming to non GIS agency staff.
• Trust for Public Land
• Top 40+ cities
• Park “score” for neighborhoods, cities
parkscore.tpl.org
CITYPop in SVCA walkable trail
CITY population 2010
Pop in PA SVCA
% in PA SVCA
% in Walkable SVCA City Class
Olathe 68385 125872 88403 70.2% 54.3% 8Topeka 24937 127473 89537 70.2% 19.6% 8Kansas City 11746 145786 71376 49.0% 8.1% 8Overland Park 100385 173372 123586 71.3% 57.9% 8Wichita 113057 382368 209062 54.7% 29.6% 8
63702 190974 116393 63.1% 33.9%
Physical Activity Deserts
• LA County Park AccessImage and analysis provided by Matt Baker, ESRI
PAD-US –
the national protected
spaces inventory
PROGRAGIS –
the NRPA model
TWO CURRENT APPROACHES
Protected Areas Database of the United States
GIS database
Huge national parks and wildlife preserves
Large swaths of forests, public lands
State and regional parks and open spaces
Some city and neighborhood parks
1 billion acres, 1000s of agencies
Established, existing framework and network of state data stewards
Focus is on comprehensive, statewide data by all suppliers
Global reporting
USGS umbrella (and state affiliates)
(e.g. Kansas ‘DASC , which publishes the KS RecFinder is the state archive of GIS data, and an affiliate of the KS Geological Survey)
Accountability
Research
Policy and program development
Show results
Maps a recognized service
Engage key publics
Collaboration across states, regions, agencies at all levels of government
National product
State stewards are key
Federal agencies, national NGOs
USGS GAP integrates all data and publishes
IntegrationFederals
,National NGOs
PAD-US already has 7+ million acres inside cities
Good data on open space resources in cities
Less complete for neighborhood parks and nothing on trails and facilities
The NRPA represents 3,000 agencies and over 20,000 professional members.
The NRPA welcomes the opportunity to collaborate with a corporate partner in compiling an accurate, nationwide park and recreation
amenity data set. Other potential partners that we envision as
possible contributors to such a worthwhile endeavor will be invited to an exploratory meeting to be scheduled at your convenience. (2012 letter)
These entities might include but are not limited to:
The US Dept of the Interior/National Park Service –
Office of State and Local Assistance Programs Division (Land and Water Conservation Fund)
US Dept of Health and Human Services –
Centers for Disease Control (grants)
NASORLO
–
Ntl. Assoc’
of State Outdoor Recreation Liaison Officers
Corporate host of National RecFinder (several have shown interest)
Current GIS partners (Green Info Network, and Applied Geographics)
Focus is truly on the local and county levelThe attributes reflect agency needs and is park and facility basedData is designed for benchmarking by agencies and communitiesGaps in non-agency data, thoughSeveral states and several hundred agencies already useGood set of existing partners (Fed, NGO, health focused, etc..)
Both PADUS and NRPA have distinct capabilities.
Both offer a network
NRPA’s focus is a bit more LWCF oriented with community level data on facilities and trails for planning and rec user interest.
PADUS appears to have an advantage in general GIS hosting and its network of data stewards, and its conservation focus.
Both have online GIS editors to simplify the process for non GIS fluent data providers
Show overall value
Show state and agency support
Assemble key stakeholders
USGS/PADUS, NRPA, NPS/LWCF, CDC, and other potential private and NGO sponsors
Establish completion target: e.g. 3 years
$1.5-5 million initial project cost
Annual updating cost of $15-80K per state
Data has $$$ (if unable to sell directly at least sell advertising for Ntl. RecFinder. ..to make this sustainable.
Share revenue with state affiliates.
Larry Orman
-Green Info
Network
Applied Geographics
–
NRPA vendor
Bill Beckner, PRORAGIS
Dee Merriam –
CDC
Barbara Tulipane, NRPA
Trust for Public Land