WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION DECEMBER 1981 VOL. 17, NO. 6

SOCIAL CLASS DIFFERENCES IN RESERVOIR VISITS’

Karen A. Conner and Cordon L. Bultena’

ABSTRACT: Previous research provides evidence of a socioeconomic bias in outdoor recreational participation. One explanation of this bias is that socioeconomic groups have differential opportunities to partici- pate, with the “costs” of th is participation especially serving to restrict the recreational access of lower class persons living in urban areas. Using driving distance as a measure of cost, this study assessed the effects of travel costs on the attendance of three social class groups from an urban population at rural reservoir facilities. Findings support the contention that, while increased driving distance has a dampening effect on re- creational participation, this effect is most pronounced for the lower class person. These fmdings point to the importance of equity con- siderations in the planning of outdoor recreational facilities. (KEY TERMS: outdoor recreation; social class; distance; reservoirs.)

Outdoor recreational activities have become very popular. In the United States, visits to water based facilities have in- creased in recent years (Carles, 1978). Yet, while the Nation’s lakes, rivers, and streams attract increasing numbers of re- creationists, there is evidence of a substantial socioeconomic bias in the visitors to these places (vaux, 1975; Defee, et aL, 1974; Rodgers, 1969; Zuzanek, 1978).

One explanation of this bias is in the differential participa- tion opportunities of social class groups. It has been observed that the frequency of recreational participation can be affected by its financial costs and these costs may especially serve to restrict the accessibility of recreational facilities to lower class groups (Hendee, 1969; Hauser, 1962).

Driving distance to outdoor recreational facilities can be a significant cost for urban residents. Outdoor facilities are often located at some distance from urban centers and travel to these facilities requires greater time and financial expenditures by visitors than does travel to nearby facilities (Beaman, etal., 1979). The potential consequences of travel costs for partici- pation levels are shown in the finding that participation levels tend to decline with increased distance between user groups and facilities (Clawson, 1959; Wennergren, 1965; Brown, er al . 1964). Frequency of citizens’ visits to public and pri- vate campbrounds (Bond and Quellette, 1968), to National Forests (King, 1965), and to reservoirs (Hecock, 1974) all have been shown to be inversely related to the travel distance between these facilities and potential user groups.

Although the effects of driving distance on recreational participation have been examined, there has been little study of the importance of distance as a contributing factor in the class bias that characterized many forms of outdoor recrea- tion. That distance traveled may be an important explanation is seen in the fact that it is positively correlated with the mean income levels of camping parties visiting the Adirondack Forest Preserve of New York State (Shafer, 1965), and is associated with the educational attainment levels of campers at White- shell Park in Canada (Nixon, 1970). Some suggest that the underrepresentation of the urban poor among park goers may turn national parks into “playgrounds for the middle and upper social class groups” (Bultena and Field, 1978, p. 396).

This study examined effects of driving distance on the social class characteristics of visitors at two large reservoirs in Iowa. Unlike previous studies which have drawn data from visitor populations, we used a random sample of a metropoli- tan population thus allowing for an assessment of the direct effect of distance on the outdoor recreational participation of an urban population. It was first hypothesized that the number of reservoir visits out of this population would decline with increased travel distance to facilities. The second hypothe- sis, which is of most interest, was that a socioeconomic bias in reservoir visitors would become apparent with increased dis- tance to the facilities, with middle and upper class persons being felt to make more frequent visits than lower class per- sons at the most distant facility. No class difference in visita- tion levels was anticipated at the nearby (i.e., low cost) reser- voir site.

Confirmation of the first hypothesis would demonstrate that distance is a salient factor impeding the urbanite’s use of reservoir facilities. Support for the second hypothesis would show that the inhibiting effects of travel distance are not equally distributed throughout the class structure, with the recreational visits of the urban poor being the most severely impeded.

SAMPLE AND PROCEDURES Data are from interviews with a sample of residents of

Des Moines, Iowa. Respondents were selected using an area

‘Report No. 81046 of the Wuter Resources Bulletin. Discussions are open until August 1,1982. ’Respectively, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, Drake University, Des Moines. Iowa 50311; and Professor of Sociology, Iowa State

University, Ames, Iowa.

1086 WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

Comer and Bultena

probability sample of households in three census tracts repre- senting lower, middle, and upper class areas of the city. All persons aged 18 and older were eligible respondents. A total of 190 interviews were conducted, with one-fifth of the eli- gible respondents being lost from the sample because of re- fusals, illness, or absence from the city.

Social class position was measured for each respondent by three conventional status indicators. Income was measured by the respondents’ self reported annual income before taxes. This figure ranged from under $3000 to more than $50,000, with the mean income being $1 3,000. Educational attainment was measured by the last year of formal education completed by the household head. The mean educational attainment was completion of high school. Occupational status of the house- hold head was measured by the Nam and Powers (1968) occu- pational status index. Scores on the index ranged from 2 to 99, with the higher scores denoting the high status occupa- tions. The mean score on the occupational status index was 76.

A composite social class measure was obtained by equally weighting (maximum of 10 points for each status variable), and then summing, respondents’ scores on the income, educa- tion, and occupational measures. These scores ranged from 3 to 30, with the mean score being 17. Three social class groups were then derived by trichotomizing the scores into “low” (3-13), “middle” (14-20), and “upper” (21-30) class groups.

Two large reservoirs, constructed, in part, to provide water based recreational opportunities for the residents of Des Moines, Iowa, were selected for study. Round trip driving distance from Des Moines to the nearest reservoir (Red Rock) is 74 miles, but is is more than double this mileage (1 98 miles round trip) to the more distant reservoir (Rathbun). Although the two reservoirs are distinguished by their distance from Des Moines, they are comprable in the types of recreational opportunities available and in their levels of facility develop- ment.

Respondents reported the number of recreational visits they had made during a two-year period to each of these re- servoirs. They were asked to include only those visits to each reservoir that were made as a direct result of wanting to sight see or to pursue a recreational activity at the reservoir. Visits were not included that were incidental to other purposes for being in the area (e.g., business trips).

FINDINGS

The first hypothesis was that the frequency of recreational visits to the two reservoirs would be inversely related to their distance from the respondents, with the more distant facility being the least visited. This hypothesis was supported. The proportion of respondents reporting one or more recreational visits declined markedly as distance to the reservoirs increased (see Table 1).

The frequency of repeat visits to these facilities provides further evidence of the effects of distance on participation. As shown in Table 1, more respondents had revisited the nearby reservoir than the distant reservoir during the two-year period.

TABLE 1. Roportion of Respondents Making One or More Recreational Visits to the Neary (Red Rock)

and Distant (Rathbun) Reservoirs.

Nearby Reservoir Distant Reservoir

Number of Vits Number Percent Number Percent

None 84 44 122 64 One 36 19 34 18 Two or More 70 37 34 18

TOTAL 190 100 190 100

The second hypothesis was that increased travel distance would be reflected in a social class bias in reservoir use. No differences were posited in the number of visits by the three class groups to the nearby reservoir, but greater visitation was anticipated for middle and upper class, than lower class per- sons, at the more distant facility.

The number of visits to these reservoirs made by persons in each social class category is shown in Table 2. Contrary to ex- pectations, lower and middle class persons were the more fre- quent visitors to the nearest reservoir. Fifty-seven and 66 per- cent of the lower and middle class respondents, respectively, reported one or more visits to the nearby reservoir, as com- pared with 43 percent of the upper class (X2=7.04; DF=2; P<O.OS). Thus, it seems that the lower and middle classes place as great, or greater, a value on reservoir based recrea- tional activities as do upper class persons. Accordingly, any shift in the relative representation of these class groups at the more distant reservoir would seemingly reflect travel cost con- siderations, rather than class based variations in the appeal of reservoir recreation.

TABLE 2. Proportion of Lower, Middle, and Upper Class Persons Visiting the Nearby and Distant Reservoirs.

Number of Vits

Nearby Reservoir Distant Reservoir

Socialaass None Oneor More Total None Oneor More Total ~~

Upper (N=56) 57 43 100 55 45 100 Middle (N=74) 34 66 100 61 39 100 Lower (N=60) 43 57 100 76 24 100

Class differences also were found in the visitation data for the more distant reservoir. But, in contrast to the nearby re- servoir, upper (45 percent) and middle class (39 percent) re- spondents were more likely than lower class respondents (24 percent) to have visited this facility (X2=6.77; DF=2; P<0.05). Differences in the proportions of lower, middle, and upper class persons visiting the nearby and distant reservoirs clearly demonstrate the class based impacts of travel distance on re- creational participation. For the upper class, there was no dif- ference in the proportion of persons making one or more

1 087 WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

Social aasS Differences in Reservoir Visits

visits to the nearby facility (43 percent) and to the more dis- tant facility (45 percent). A sharp decline, however, was found for the lower class, with 57 percent having gone to the nearby facility, but only 24 percent to the more distant facility. Simi- larly, middle class visitation declined with increased distance, with 66 percent having been to the nearby facility, but only 39 percent to the distant facility.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Evidence suggests a social class bias in many outdoor re-

creational activities, with upper and middle class persons often being overrepresented. One explanation has been opportunity costs, with these costs seen as particularly restrictive for lower class persons. Our findings provide documentation of how op portunity costs, as measured by travel distance, can serve as a barrier to nonurban recreational participation for low income urban people.

These findings point to an important equity issue in the development of recreational facilities. When class differences are evident in the use of recreational facilities, can these dif- ferences be attributed to different cultural orientations toward desired activities, or are they more the result of the costs of participation? Our findings suggest that equitable access to reservoir facilities is very much a function of travel distance, with increased distance having served to impede the equitable representation of lower class persons.

A much voiced objective of facility development is to pro- vide citizens enriched recreational opportunities. Equity of access commonly is sought by setting low or nonexistent user fees and/or by public subsidization. But other participation costs, in addition to user fees, may greatly affect the accessi- bility of these facilities t o different socioeconomic groups. Whereas the poor are numerically concentrated in metropoli- tan areas, many public supported water based recreational facilities offering swimming, boating, hiking, camping, and other activities are located in rural settings. Our findings sug- gest that to the extent recreational facilities are situated away from population centers, they may be relatively inaccessible to many lower class persons who would otherwise be attracted to the recreational activities offered at these sites.

LITERATURE CITED

Beaman, J., Y. Kim, and S. Smith, 1979. The Effect of Recreation Supply on Participation. Leisure Sciences 2:71-87.

Bond, R. S. and G. J. Quellette, 1968. Qlaracteristics of Campers in Massachusetts. Department of Forestry and wildlife Management. University of Massachusetts, Publication 527.

Brown, W., A. Singe, and E. Castle, 1964. An Economic Evaluation of the Oregon Salmon and Steelhead Sports Fishery. Corvallis Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station, Technical Bulletin 78.

Bultena, G. and D. Field, 1978. Visitors to National Parks: A Test of the Elitism Argument. Leisure Sciences 4:395409.

Carles, E. G., 1978. A Simulation Model of Wild River Use. Leisure Sciences 4 : 209-21 8.

Clawson, M., 1959. Methods of Measuring Demand for the Value of Outdoor Recreation. Resources for the Future, Reprint No. 10.

1 oaa

Defee, J. F., J. H. Schultz, and R. Pacework, 1974. Occupational Level and Organizational Membership. Journal of Leisure Research 6:20- 26.

Hauser, P. M., 1962. Demographic and Ecological changes as Factors in Outdoor Recreation. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Com- mission, Report No. 22, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing ton, D.C.

Hecock, R., 1974. The Spatial Dimension: A New Reservoir and R e creational Behavior. Growth and Change, July:17-20.

Hendee, J. C., 1969. Rpral-Urban Differences Reflected in Outdoor Recreational Participation. Journal of Leisure Research 1 :333-341.

King, D., 1965. Characteristics of Family Campers Using the Huron- Maintee National Forests. Lakes States Forest Experiment Station, Research Paper CS-19, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Nam, C. B. and M. G. Powers, 1968. Changes in the Relative Status Level of Workers in the United States, 1950-1960. Social Forces 47:

Niion, H. N., 1970. Whiteshell Provincial Park Visitor Use Study. De- partment of Tourism and Recreation, Research and Planning Branch, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

158-1 70.

Rodgers, B., 1969. Leisure and Recreation. Urban Studies 6:369-384. Shafer, E. L., Jr., 1965. Socioeconomic Characteristics of Adirondack

Vaux, H. J., Jr., 1975. The Distribution of Income Among Wilderness

Wennergreen, E. G., 1965. Value of Water for Boating Recreation. Utah

Zuzanek, J., 1978. Social Differences in Leisure Behavior: Measure-

Campers. Journal of Forestry 633690.694.

Users. Journal of Leisure Research 7:29-37.

Agricultural Expedmental Station, Bulletin 453, Logan, Utah.

ment and Interpretation. Leisure Sciences 1 :271-294.

WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN