|
Quoted from the appended NY Times article:
["But this new potential generation of paddler that gets introduced to the sport through concrete structures isn't going to have that same exposure to an environmental ethic," Mr. Singleton said. Problems may arise if and when those boaters outgrow the park and head for a real river, he said. He drew a parallel to snowboarders and skiers who learn in terrain parks and then decide they want a real mountain experience. "We see the things that sometimes cross over - graffiti, cigarette butts, an uncaring attitude," he said.]
THE GREAT OUTDOORS is a term the American Recreation Coalition has promoted for twenty five years. Most of us use it, but few know the driving force behind the effort to engrain this phrase into our culture.
Did you know that Great Outdoors Week has long been the name of ARC's major annual lobbying event www.funoutdoors.com/events/gow ? Did you know that Great Outdoors Month is a relatively recent ARC partnership involving all of the Federal land management agencies and the ARC and ARC's friends www.greatoutdoorsmonth.org
The article which follows is about "a" Great Outdoors that has nothing to do with "the" Great Outdoors but which, at a deeper level, has everything to do with it.
You've been reading many articles about National Park management policies and the desire of the recreation industry to make the parks more fun for visitors. You might have read today's NY Times editorial in which they singled out, and slapped down, the ARC for their efforts to reconfigure the National Park System and make The Great Outdoors more compatible with the ARC's particular brand of industrial strength fun.
I'm now suggesting that there is a DIRECT connection between the effort to reconfigure the public lands and the effort to "tailor" the management of THE Great Outdoors so that it better meets the needs and EXPECTATIONS of an entirely new breed of outdoor wreckreationists.
I'm suggesting that not only is ARC to blame for this but so is the Outdoor Industry Association. The combination of the ARC and its motorized groups with the OIA and its non-motorized groups will, if permitted, tailor all of the Great Outdoors to the liking of one wreckreation group or another. If they succeed, the once great outdoors will be reduced to a plethora of marketable, commercial, entertainment centers staged in fresh-air settings. That is what I mean when I speak of "The Corporate Takeover of Nature and Disneyfication of the Wild."
Scott
---- begin quoted ----
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/weekinreview/09fountain.html?ex=1152504000&en=fd55856377b90745&ei=5087%0A
Ideas & Trends
The Great Outdoors, Tailored to Your Needs
By HENRY FOUNTAIN
Published: July 9, 2006
THESE days, the authentic outdoor sporting experience is fast becoming
an endangered species. Climbing walls substitute for real rock faces,
which themselves are studded with anchor bolts installed by
recreationists. Rivers are manipulated to create white water for
rafting and kayaking. Some ski trails have even been built indoors.
But little in the realm of manufactured nature quite approaches the
U.S. National Whitewater Center, a $32 million commercial park set to
open next month just 10 minutes from downtown Charlotte, N.C. The
center, with rapids designed to challenge weekend rafters and serious
kayakers alike, is completely self-contained, and completely
artificial. Every boulder in its concrete channels was placed there by
design. The water, which comes from the municipal supply, not from an
adjacent river, is pumped around the park. When kayakers finish a run,
they ride an escalator back to the top.
With its convenient location and thrilling yet safe rapids, the backers
hope to attract people willing to pay $25 a day to kayak, or $33 for 90
minutes in a raft with a guide.
Yet there are people who wonder if, in the manufacturing of an outdoor
experience, something is lost. If people are exposed to a nature that
isn't authentic, they say, how will they learn to protect the real
thing?
Mark Singleton, executive director of American Whitewater, a sporting
and conservation group, said that the artificial river should appeal to
young people who are unable to drive hours to a real one.
"But this new potential generation of paddler that gets introduced to
the sport through concrete structures isn't going to have that same
exposure to an environmental ethic," Mr. Singleton said.
Problems may arise if and when those boaters outgrow the park and head
for a real river, he said. He drew a parallel to snowboarders and
skiers who learn in terrain parks and then decide they want a real
mountain experience.
"We see the things that sometimes cross over - graffiti, cigarette butts, an uncaring attitude," he said.
The Charlotte project is the most extreme example of a trend in
whitewater sports toward more controlled environments. In recent years,
rivers around the country, often in urban areas, have been transformed
into stretches of rapids, re-engineered with concrete beds and
strategically placed boulders. Cities from Reno, Nev., to South Bend,
Ind., have embraced the idea, seeing economic advantages in attracting
boaters and tourists.
Jeff Wise, a Charlotte businessman who is executive director of the
whitewater center, said that river parks, like his project, are
convenient "gateways" for people who have considered paddling but have
never wanted to drive for hours to reach white water. Many of those
people will go on to experience, and appreciate, real rivers. "They're
not going to say, 'I never want to leave my backyard,' " he said.
But Mr. Wise defended the experience in the parks as genuine. "A
concrete channel is not as authentic as a natural channel, but the
experience is real," he said. "It's not an amusement ride."
Others are not so sure.
"There is a kind of biochemical cocktail that's mixed up when you put
yourself into the hands of nature that simply is not there in something
that approximates an amusement park ride," said Tim Cahill, a longtime
writer for Outside magazine and other adventure publications. There is
a danger, he added, "that what you're going to have is people who are
really good at kayaking pools and unalert and unaware of the changes
that happen naturally to rivers."
Peter Ferenbach, executive director of Friends of the River, a
conservation group in California, said projects like Charlotte's can't
substitute for the real thing. "I think people are really put in touch
with how beautiful and complex rivers are when they're on the river,"
he said. "That's not something you are ever going to experience in a
water park."
Still, the trend shows no signs of slowing down. Gary Lacy, whose
company, Recreation Engineering and Planning, designed the Charlotte
project, said he hasdmore work than he can handle, as more cities want
to create parks in neglected rivers.
Mr. Cahill agreed that more whitewater parks might not be such a bad
thing. "It gives the outdoor sportsman who much prefers the actual wild
river a little more space on his own river," he said. "It gives the
person who wants to improve his or her kayak skills a place to do it.
And it gives the complete novice a chance to do it in a setting that's
reasonably safe."
"Personally, you wouldn't find me there," Mr. Cahill said. "But then again, I'm from the old school."
|
- Outdoor recreation 
