John Jacino

Environmental Concerns of a Park Manager By John J. Jacino, Ranger Lake Le-Aqua-Na State Park Lena, Illinois

The term "jack-of-all-trades" was invented especially for the park manager. He must be a biologist, an upholder of regulations, a first aider, a social scientist and a walking information center, among other things. He must also be a person whose utmost concern is the environment.

The problem of imposing masses of people on a natural resource base, and the resulting environmental stresses, grows more intense when the park manager faces inadequate "green space" acquisition.

The parklands are victim of an interesting paradox—with all the talk of economic restrainsts, unemployment and inflation, the public is buying more trailbikes, more snowmobiles, more back-packing outfits, more campers, power-boats . . . and the list goes on. The demand for suitable areas to operate these grows proportionately.

How do we identify potential environmental concerns to the resource base? I will attempt to describe identification methods in two approaches, (1) To assess the "people effect" on four aspects of the total resource base —land, water, flora and fauna— and (2) to list some of the expected concerns by characterized recreational pursuits.

What is the "people effect" on land?

A. Roadways, culverts, parking lots and bridges will be required. Careful placement, and careful planning with aesthetic and ecological considerations is demanded.

B. People need horse and foot trails which are free from the usual inherent dangers of littering, destruction of vegetation, danger of fire and potential erosion.

C. Impervious camping pads, roads, and parking lots have a profound effect on the ability of surface water to percolate into the soil. Depending on the soil type, this can be another sure way to erosion problems.

What is the affect of people on water?

A. Contamination of the water, making it unfit for consumption or contact.

B. Unlawful dumping of bilge tanks, etc. into water resource.

C. Power boat operation resulting in erosion of shoreline, high level of noise pollution and conflict with other water users.

D. Overfishing can upset the desirable aquatic balance in the lake or stream.

E. If wastes from land-based sanitary facilities enter water resource, water quality will be affected—smells, algae—and perhaps the result will be eventual abandonment of the uses the water originally was intended for.

What is the "people effect" on flora?

A. Compaction of soil may destroy trees or plants.

B. Destruction of vegetation by removal, trampling, etc., may result in erosion.

C. People caused fires denuding vast tracts of vegetation.

What is the effect of people on fauna?

A. Nests and breeding areas may be destroyed.

B. The mere physical presence of masses of people may have a deleterious effect on certain species.

C. Overkill during hunting season, and illegal "poaching" of protected our out-of-season species may be serious.

D. "Semi-domestication" of wildlife (feeding, etc.) can only have an undesirable effect.

To approach the problem in a different way, let us briefly list some of the more popular recreational pursuits and the obvious, and subtle, "people effects" they might have:

—Fishing: littering, stream bank erosion, overtake.

—Boating: shore erosion, bilge tank emptying, conflict with other users, easier access to areas formerly difficult.

—Trail bikes: erosion, compaction, wandering off trail.

—Camping: sanitation considerations, impervious pads, destruction of trees, compaction.

—Snowmobiling: Harrassment of wildlife, compaction of snow blanket, easy access to delicate and remote areas, noise pollution.

These are but a few of the activities that are practiced on the natural resource base.

To put the problem into some kind of perspective, let us view

Illinois Parks and Recreation 22 July/August, 1974

a park that at one corner contains a few thousand acres of relatively wild land that is served only by a few foot trails. It is visited by photographers, hikers, birders and adventure-some botanists. Under pressure and the misguided philosophy that we must "open it up," get some "use" out of it, we put in a road system, a campground, parking lots and toilets.

While none of the following is guaranteed to happen, it is likely a few of these instances will:

—The deer that used to drop their fawns there, no longer come. Deer become scarce. Could be the snowmobiles that crisscross the area in winter when the does are weak and pregnant?

—The road and those beautiful blacktop parking lots and camp pads have caused a lot more run-off, and now ugly scars of ruts lace the area. That stand of lady-slipper and showy orchis just past the parking lot are almost gone now—picked or trampled.

—That grassy-banked stream that always held native brook trout now has trampled dirt paths along both sides. The trout have been replaced by the ubiquitous carp. Where the road crosses the stream, an aquatic junkyard has bloomed.

A sordid story, indeed. But one that has happened too many times to be pushed out of sight. What, then, can we do both to stop this from happening and to recognize "trends" in wildlife, vegetation and land forms that might signal environmental sickness. I am hopeful the following will be of help:

Spread out the use, both "inter" and "intra" park. Can we publicize some of the lesser-known parks?

Watch "indicator species." We don't need a Ph.D. in ecology to know that if suddenly watercress disappears from a stream, something has happened.

If trout are replaced by carp, a problem exists.

Constant surveillance, checking sources of potential danger, noting trends in wildlife census, and taking stream samples are ways of checking the environment.

We must convey the idea sooner or later that each and every park can not be all things to all people. We can not let multiple use become multiple abuse.

Careful planning can eliminate a majority of environmental concerns before the first person sets foot on the resource. Careful identification and inventory of the resource components is paramount.

Adherence to comprehensive "master plans." A good master plan should contain careful justification, and can not be written and forgotten—it must be constantly evaluated and improved.

A viable in-service training program to educate all phases of park management on environmental concerns is important.

Resource "interpretation." Through use of slide programs, campfire councils, guided hikes, self guiding trails, habitat demonstrations and visitor centers, a sense of respect, even kinship, can hopefully be instilled in the public. We must strive to create a place in the public's value system for wild things, for wild places.

Recognizing the overt, obvious threats to the environmental integrity of the areas we manage is relatively easy; it is sensing the subtle trends of gradual, though sure, environmental degradation that is our challenge.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 23 July/August, 1974