You are here

Reader Survey Day: Should The National Park Service Angle For "A New Generation," Or "Go Back To Its Roots"?

Share

The clock is ticking down to the National Park Service's centennial in 2016, and the focus of the PR campaign has been on attracting a new generation to the parks. But how far should the agency go in trying to lure millennials and a more diverse visitor?

At least one Park Service veteran wants to see the agency "regain the spirit of John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt."

And that's the dilemma the Park Service and its New York City advertising agency face. Should they hot wire the National Park System for Wi-Fi so visitors can share their latest snapshot or selfie with their Instagram or Facebook friends and present more interpretive programs for digital delivery and send fewer rangers into the field to interact?

Or should the Park Service focus on why national parks exist in the first place: to preserve sublime settings and remind us of our poignant American history and rich cultures?

The other day a column popped into my inbox from the Traverse City Record-Eagle, a newspaper in Traverse City, Michigan, just outside Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore. Written by a retired Park Service veteran of 40+ years in the system who uses the pseudonym "Max Old Bear," the point of the column seemed to be that the Park Service doesn't need to reinvent itself.

Now, Max's specific gripe in last Saturday's column was focused on a ribbon of asphalt the lakeshore has laid through a section of its forests to accommodate cyclists and hikers. Come winter, Max went on, the multi-use path is even groomed for skiers. ("The skiers even have the chutzpah to whine about snowshoe users on 'their' tractor-packed trail," he huffed.)

And where there first were cyclists and then skiers, the trail now is even used for races, he noted.

"The people were smart enough to set aside this land as a national treasure and entrust it to the stewardship of the National Park Service because the National Park Service had the trust, history and obligation of resource preservation," wrote Max. "I urge the Park Service to go back to its roots. At least, do no harm. Regain the spirit of John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt."

In the months ahead, this sort of debate will surely surface again and again. How far should the Park Service go in trying to bring in younger generations and different racial audiences to the parks? Is the agency losing touch with the spirit of John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt? Muir's legacy recently was called into question recently during a conference in California. As far as we know, no similar shrug of the shoulder has been given to President Roosevelt, arguably the greatest conservationist ever to have called the White House home.

But as the drive towards the centennial in 2016 grows, how much will the Park Service leadership give in in the guise of building a visitation base to succeed the Baby Boomers? How much should it?

What do you think?

 

Comments

Instead of trying to put in cell towersto lure young folks back in the parks, perhaps the NPS should go back to the roots of NOT charging taxpayers to use the National Parks.  When it costs as much to go to a theme park as visit a forest, you will lose relevance over time.


Why should it be a choice between adding electronic means of interpretation and putting more rangers in the field?

Perhaps some concentration on educating visitors about WHY parks are so important and what has already been lost is also needed.  Surely there is more than just a very narrow set of values that can be communicated to visitors.


Seriously, the only people perpetuating this nonsense is boomers that barely use technology.  People still post photos to instagram and facebook without the need to be instantly wired-in.  Millenials and gen-xers are using the parks.  its not even an issue and is entirely overblown.


Boomers are the ones who hike in parks week after week, volunteer week after week, donate to parks and join Friends groups.

Boomers bring their children and grandchildren to parks. Children can only go to parks if adults are willing to take them.

We want to see and talk to rangers face to face, not on a screen.

Danny Bernstein www.hikertohiker.com

 


Think the historic and cultural roots of these Parks have it all over today's "virtual" approach as far as really connecting on a transformational level.  The virtual is a distant, well, I don't know how far down the line it is.  Some would say you have to be relevant, like leading tours of the Park dumps to see the bears?  


I'm wondering if this is REALLY a valid issue or not?


There is no shortage of people of all ages (and all walks of life) posting photos from the National Parks on facebook, instagram, and using twitter.  I know for a fact through social media statistics, that boomers (55 and older) only make up around a 1/5th of the social media traffic on one of the smokies social media pages.  The younger generations comprise most of the traffic, and a lot of likes, and shares are from people of all ages, not just baby boomers.  On popular trails in a majority of our bigger National Parks, one can find people of all ages hiking them.  Almost every shelter or campsite i've been at this year  had teens, college aged kids, and younger people camped out enjoying the backcountry, and that's from not only trekking in the Smokies, but in 4 other National parks.  I almost always spot a diverse group in almost all of the parks. In a few parks, like Bryce Canyon and Arches, i've had experiences where I didn't even feel like I was in my own country.

Most boomers gave up backpacking a long time ago, but on the AT, Pacific Crest trail, etc there's no shortage of youth seeking out and using the trails. In fact, now the "fear" is that movies like "Wild" and "A Walk in the Woods" are going to create a "youth boom" on these trails as these films popularize them.   Ohh gosh forbid!!   I don't get where this "only boomers" use the park mentality derives from, and it drives a lot of us nuts when this is stated constantly. It's like the rest of us don't matter.  There was an article recently written here from a millenial that lived in Montana trying to dispell this myth, and I agreed with almost all I saw in her article...  I get that the retirees have more time, but back in the 1970s and 80s, was it that vastly different when the WW2 generation had time on their hands to travel, while the boomers worked full time?  I'm sure back then, the same could have been stated about the WW2 generation and that the boomer generation was neglecting the parks, and that if something didn't change, all would fall by the wayside and the National Parks would cease to exist.    I'm willing to bet that if anyone took a camera along popular trails like Half Dome in Yosemite, Chimneys in the Smokies, Bright Angel in the GC, and Angels Landing in Zion that one would find that baby boomers are outnumbered by at least 3 to 1 on these trails (and in some cases more).  In fact, they might be suprised to find how many "millenials" and "gen xers" are in the park.

I follow a lot of the facebook, and instagram feeds from the NPS, and there seems to be no shortage of people posting pictures from their recent excursions.  People don't need to be instantly wired to still use these services along the way during a vacation.  In fact, many post to them a few days after their trip, and it seems to still generate likes and engagement.  

Social media is changing the landscape too.  Back in the 80s and 90s the best chance to find up to date information on a park was by calling the parks visitor center.  Today, just by having millions of people reached by a single post on facebook, twitter or instagram, anyone instantly knows what is occuring in the parks.  Whether it's saguaros in bloom in arizona, leafs at peak in the appalachian mountains, or if the Grand Tetons is recieving a 4 foot snow storm. It's only been about 3 years that many of the major parks have been using social media too.  But, now their posts reach out to millions (and site traffic continues to grow upward daily), and baby boomers are just a % of those millions.  Social media is educating end exposing the parks to a large and diverse group of people that could never have been achieved decades ago. 


Ask yourself Lee..  When you are out in the wilds of Salt Lake, is there any shortage of youths that are not recreating in the backcountry of the wasatch! Heck, the olympics sure did spur that "youth movement" and brought in quite a bit of ski resort traffic.

Here is another article about how a movie is causing people to think "hey, let's go hike the PCT!"

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/dec/08/wild-film-spurs-new-interest-p...


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.