A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States

Cover

Contents

Foreword

Supplemental Foreword

Introduction

Recreational Habits and Needs

Aspects of Recreational Planning

Present Public Outdoor Recreational Facilities

Administration

Financing

Legislation

A Park and Recreational Land Plan

A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States

THE BUDGET

The budget, properly prepared and intelligently used, is one of the major indices of efficient park administration. It is a form of advance planning, for one year, two years, or longer periods, essential to businesslike conduct of every phase of the park program—land acquisition, development, operation, and maintenance. Without it, legislative appropriations become a matter of blind trust—an attitude not common to legislative bodies,—development a haphazard process, and operation a hand-to-mouth procedure that may result in feast for one park and famine for another.

In its essence the successfully framed budget is the result of a careful weighing of prospective or hoped-for funds against carefully ascertained prospective needs. Since available funds are rarely adequate to permit acquisition of all the lands desired, construction of all the facilities needed or furnishing of all the services which could wisely be supplied, the process is one of determining the relative priorities of the various phases of the program and of providing for "first things first."

The purpose of the budget is twofold. One is that of indicating to the appropriating body what funds are needed and how and why it is proposed to spend them. Appropriating bodies frequently have their own ideas about such matters which do not coincide with those of the persons who prepare and submit budgets. Frequently also, park budgets undergo changes at the hands of such intervening agencies as the department of which parks and recreation are a division, a budget office, or a governor. In any such event, adjustment in proposed expenditures becomes necessary, whereupon the revised budget is ready to perform its second function, that of a guide for actual expenditure.

In the case of a State, the basis for that portion of the budget concerned with land acquisition should, of course, be the carefully considered State park and recreational plan from which any long-range program should proceed. Basis for development of individual areas is, of course, the master plan and those lay-out plans which develop from it, as well as construction plans for which costs have been soundly figured. The principal basis for the administration, operation, and maintenance items of the budget is very largely experience, whether that of the State operating under the budget or of other States which have faced and met similar problems. Agencies new in the business of park operation are forced to rely in the beginning on the experience of others and on the most intelligent adaptation of that experience to their own special requirements.

Both because it is public money that is being expended, and because the supply of it is seldom fully adequate, an accounting system is needed of that more than meets the accounting requirements of the State or other governmental agency concerned. It should be such as to permit ready analysis of costs in order to produce economies that will make funds go further, and to permit preparation of budgets with a minimum of guesswork. No matter how carefully any budget is prepared, it is at best a prediction. Since those who prepare budgets are not seventh sons of seventh sons, their predictions are fallible, and their budgets and the appropriations made to fulfill them should be flexible. Most States appropriate either by lump sums or by major classifications of expenditure, which permit adjustment of actual expenditures to meet unforeseen contingencies. Appropriations approved item by item would prove, and have proved, a severe handicap to effective operation.

At the request of the National Conference on State Parks, and in order to provide accurate and comparable information on financial operation of all State park systems, an annual State park record is being compiled by the National Park Service from statistics prepared by the States. It is expected that this record will be extremely valuable in the preparation of future budgets. Comparative information may be valuable in obtaining funds by showing inadequacies compared to other States. However, differences between the States, in income, character of population, recreation habits, etc., are such that comparisons should be made only with the utmost caution and after proper evaluation of such factors of difference as those listed.

According to every scale of measurement, the performance records of park systems show wide variation. This variation reflects differences in interest, various levels of economic conditions, and different qualities of park systems.

The results of a study of the financing of 14 State park systems give some idea of the adequacy of recreation funds, the small per capita amounts involved to date, and indications of expenditures compared with other public and private obligations. The annual State park record can give wider and better figures for future use.

The accompanying chart (fig. 35) is a comparative study prepared by one State showing increase in use, increases in areas, and history of operation funds.

Figure 35. (click on image for an enlargement in a new window)

NEXT >>>

Last Modified: Mon, Aug 9 2004 10:00:00 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/park_recreation/chap4e.htm