April 2016 - Parks & Recreation - 47

education - 81 percent possessed a
higher level of education above high
school; and political affiliation - 42
percent Democrat, 33 percent Republican and 24 percent Independent
or no affiliation.
Key Findings
In general, most respondents expressed familiarity with the process of hydraulic fracturing. More
than 60 percent reported being either
somewhat familiar or very familiar
with the term " hydraulic fracturing; "
on the other hand, 10 percent had
never heard of the term before taking the survey. Almost one-third of
the sample lived in a region impacted
(either currently or expected to be) by
fracking. Most respondents (40 percent) opposed fracking in any form;
while 23 percent were supportive,
25 percent were on the fence, and 12
percent were unsure.
Park users expressed concern that
fracking, occurring on or near their
public parks, would negatively impact
their participation. Only one-third of
participants indicated their willingness to participate in recreational activities near fracking operations (33
percent, compared to 38 percent unwilling and 29 percent neutral). More
than half of all respondents also expressed the following:
*	 Concern that a fracking operation
would limit their ability to access
their park (52 percent)
*	 Willingness to travel further to visit
a park unaffected by fracking (56
percent)
*	 Support for legislation prohibiting
fracking near their favorite park (58
percent)
In general, park users believed
that fracking on public land was
unnecessary and bad for the environment. More park users agreed that

1

2

3
	

fracking on public land was bad for
the environment (48 percent) compared to those who agreed fracking
had no impact on the environment
(16 percent). More park users also
supported banning fracking on public land (46 percent, as opposed to 20
percent who agreed with promoting
it). Fifty percent of respondents believed fracking on public land should
be subject to greater oversight and
regulation, while 13 percent believed
it should be subject to less oversight
and regulation. When neutral responses were removed from calculation, the contrasts were much starker.
While park users generally held
strong opinions that fracking had
a negative impact on the natural environment, most park users surveyed
for this study were less critical when
it came to its economic benefits. Park
users' attitudes toward the economic impact of fracking on public land
were far more neutral (e.g., regarding
its contribution to traffic and gas prices), and in some cases, were positive
(such as its impact on the creation of
temporary jobs).

4

Conclusions
Based on the results of this study
(http://plaza.ufl.edu/tkellison/_/
Fracking.html), it is clear that some
park users in Appalachia are concerned about the future of their
public green spaces. Park users who
participated in this survey expressed
concern that their ability to access
and enjoy their favorite local, state or
provincial, or federal parks systems
could become hindered if nearby
land was to be leased for natural gas
exploration and extraction. While it
is somewhat unclear why park users
might have this suspicion, their survey responses yield some insight. Although some park users may believe

their access to a park could become
limited due to increased traffic or
park closures, there is some evidence
to suggest park users would avoid
parks near fracking operations out
of personal preference: 38 percent
disagreed with the statement, " I am
willing to participate in recreational
activities near a fracking operation, "
and 56 percent indicated they were
" willing to travel further to visit a
park that was not affected by fracking
operations. "
The results offer insight related to
the implications of fracking and provide evidence to use caution on the
acceptance of fracking near public
lands. For example, for park directors
living in areas where fracking might
soon take place, this study suggests
your park visitors might be less likely to attend your facilities. Therefore,
it is important for concerned parties to speak up and share anxieties
with legislators. Our results are fairly
clear: People seek to avoid areas near
fracking operations. Thus, park directors should be at the forefront of the
current debates around privatization
of public lands and fracking leases.
Detailed references for this article may
be found at [http://plaza.ufl.edu/tkellison/_/Home_files/Fracking-Parkland_
Report.pdf].

Jonathan Casper, Ph.D., is Associate
Professor, Department of Parks, Recreation
and Tourism Management at North Carolina
State University (jmcasper@ncsu.edu).
Timothy Kellison, Ph.D., is Assistant
Professor, Department of Kinesiology and
Health at Georgia State University (tkellison@
ufl.edu). Kyle Bunds, Ph.D., is Assistant
Professor Department of Parks, Recreation
and Tourism Management at North Carolina
State University (ksbunds@ncsu.edu). Josh
Newman, Ph.D., is Associate Professor,
Department of Sport Management at Florida
State University (jinewman@fsu.edu).

W W W. PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N . O R G | A P R I L 2 0 1 6 |

Parks & Recreation

45
April 2016 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of April 2016 - Parks & Recreation
