NAI Blog

I had an opportunity to do some interpretive training recently, in a rather unique setting—on a cruise ship.  The Central Coast Natural History Association was hosting an ocean cruise as a fund-raising activity to help support California State Parks. On the days we were at sea, we included some interpretive training presentations for the docents on the cruise.

The docents and other parks supporters were just a small part of the nearly two thousand people on this cruise ship. During one of our training sessions, looking at various audience segments, it was pointed out that many of the folks on the ship were spending more time in the buffet line or the casino than outdoors on the deck. While a few of us were spending time on deck looking at seabirds and marine mammals, hundreds of other passengers were in the spa, watching movies in the theater, or playing cards in the casino. It became a kind of challenge we issued to ourselves: Let’s see how many of those folks we can get interested in looking at the ocean that is passing by.

We had some limited success standing on the deck with binoculars looking at passing seabirds. The few passengers that walked outside on the decks might stop and ask what we were looking at. And a few others stopped by to listen in on our conversations about glaciers, shearwaters, sun dogs, and sea turtles. But we still weren’t reaching much of that “casino crowd.” We were about to concede defeat in our efforts to connect more passengers to the ocean world around them.

Then something happened that turned the tide in our favor.  A few humpback whales appeared during lunch one day, plainly visible from the crowded buffet seating area—if one was paying attention to the ocean, and we were. I could see the docents jump up, pointing and cheering “whales!” Soon hundreds of diners were on their feet, eagerly looking out at the ocean to spot the whales. They were asking “What kind are they?” “How big are they?” and many other questions.

Over the next few days we saw more whales and dolphins—and more passengers looking out at them. It restored my faith in human kind and in the power of enthusiastic interpretation to inspire even a seemingly “unreachable” audience.  Of course the help of charismatic megafauna like whales certainly helps. I’m not sure we’d have seen the same reaction if we had jumped up and exclaimed: “There’s a Xantus’s murrelet!”

I was reminded how essential it is as an interpreter to get excited about your subject and share that passion with others. That childlike curiosity resides deep within each of us, but it can be easily buried and suppressed as we grow up. An enthusiastic interpreter can peel away that overburden and allow that curiosity, that sense of wonder that Rachel Carson spoke of, to help us rediscover our connections to the world around us. Our own personal passion for nature, history, and heritage is nearly irresistible when applied skillfully—especially when you throw in a whale or two.

A few weeks ago it was looking like most of California’s 279 state park units might be closing due to the state’s budget crisis. A lot of public pressure was brought to bear against park closures, and the legislature reinstated a portion of the park system budget. However, the governor has “blue lined” another $6 million from the proposed budget. At this point the state may still close 100 or more park units.  As of this writing, the list of closures is still pending.

When you think about it, you can’t realistically lock the gates on most parks. There are all kinds of entry points where folks can and will sneak in. Without the general public using the parks, there is an increased potential for arson, vandalism and other damage to park resources. So you have to keep some staff presence to protect the resource. What is eliminated from a closed park is the revenue generation from entrance and camping fees, access for legitimate recreators (who are also voters!) school field trips to learn about the cultural and natural history of their state—and yes, you may reduce some maintenance and staff costs in the bargain, but this is no bargain. In fact, it has been estimated that each dollar spent in operating state parks generates over $2 in the local economies that service park visitors. So this stands to be a significant hit to some rural economies around California. And then there’s the issue of potential violation of contractual agreements with concessionaires and cooperating associations in parks that are closed.

Many years ago I did my thesis research on the California State Park System, and conducted a system-wide analysis of all the units at that time (as I recall there were about 180 units at that point).  This was in the early 1980’s when California was grappling with severe budget reductions as a result of a property tax limitation measure adopted by voters (Proposition 13). One chapter of that thesis explored the concept of “cutback management,” with the suggestion of reducing expenses by closing or reducing effort in parks that weren’t as economically viable as others. While this made sense from a data analysis perspective, it was a very unpopular idea politically. Park units are established for many reasons—protecting unique resources, creating recreational opportunities, helping to generate economic activity in some areas. We rarely create parks to make money, yet we seem to be using revenue as the measuring stick to judge the value of parks these days. I learned the folly of that approach as a graduate student years ago, and that approach is just as unrealistic today.

Our heritage is a public good, far beyond an economic necessity. Interpreters are the way we connect to that heritage. Without both, we can easily become adrift in a culture with no sense of direction. To save our heritage is to save ourselves. There’s no price tag large enough to match that value.

Most of you have probably heard about California’s budget crisis by now.  Seems like this is almost a perpetual story in recent years, made particularly acute by the sagging state economy and serious decline in revenues to government at all levels in the state.  In an effort to make up a shortfall in excess of $23 billion, the governor has proposed some draconian cuts, including closing 220 of the 279 state park units in California.

Now you may be thinking There but for the grace of God go I.  I sincerely hope that the agency or organization that supports your position and programs is in good financial shape and that you’re not in immediate fear of losing a job or a program.  Whether your programs are secure or shaky, you may want to pay some attention to what’s happening in California.

California State Parks has a very active support group, the California State Parks Foundation, and many of the individual park units have auxiliary or friends groups that help raise funds and awareness for the parks.  These support groups have ramped up an extensive public awareness and advocacy campaign to fight the closure of state park units.  Similar efforts are underway for various local and county park systems around the state.

Park advocates point out that the cost of operating parks is but a fraction of one percent of the overall state budget, and that many parks bring in significant revenue, earning back a large part of their operating cost.  In an economy where many families are relying on state and local parks to provide camping opportunities, summer day camps and other inexpensive family recreation, closing parks and programs may have huge social costs as well.In another wrinkle on this complex story, the National Park Service has informed the state the federal government may take over six state parks that were created on former federal lands.  In transferring the land to California State Parks, there is a requirement that public access to the sites be maintained.  Some feel that closing these state parks would violate that agreement and the land should revert back to federal management (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/01/ap/national/main5127931.shtml).

The drive to rescue 220 state parks from the budget crisis is a good case study in justifying your existence in the political and socioeconomic arena.  The campaign has some well-developed and effective strategy—and a lot of supporters that are gathering momentum.  You never know when your staff and programs may be put in a similar position, and we might do well to watch the California campaign to gather successful ideas and strategy if we ever need them.

Here are a few web sites where you can learn more:

California State Parks Foundation: http://ga3.org/campaign/budget_may09

Save Our State Parks Campaign: http://www.savestateparks.org/