Parks Week #2: Gaps in Parks Master Planning

Parks Week.  I am calling this "Parks Week" because for the first time I will be attending the National Recreation and Parks Association national conference, in Philadelphia.  I hope to learn a lot and write some posts too.

Looking southeast across Sugar House Pond.

Based on my experience as a board member of Sugar House Park, a park in Salt Lake City that is jointly owned by the city and county, and overseen by a proto-land trust ("the board") I wrote a ten part series on "gaps in parks master planning."

Not every park master plan has these gaps, but enough do, or the way that they address one of the gaps may be inadequate, hence the list.

-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part One | Levels of Service"

-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Two | Utilizing Academic Research as Guidance"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Three | Planning for Climate Change/Environment"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Four | Planning for Seasonality and Activation"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Five | Planning for Public Art as an element of park facilities"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning, Part Six | Art(s) in the Park(s) as a comprehensive program"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Seven | Park Architectural (and Landscape Design) History" 
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Eight | Civic Engagement"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Nine | Second stage planning for parks using the cultural landscape framework" 

-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Ten | Park transportational access" (2025)

Children playing at the Parley's Creek Playground.

I have two more in (desultory) progress, one on park equity, the other on recreation center planning in downtowns.

The first piece is definitely out of my experiences both in DC and on the east coast, as well as the tricky intergrovernmental relationships in Salt Lake.

It's on "Levels of Service," the basic point is that urban parks have more needs for maintenance, perhaps programming, security, and other elements compared to most suburban parks.  This creates a problem with the County because most of their experience with parks is suburban.  E.g., they have limited problems with homelessness (so do we, but it's purely out of luck--geographical and topographical elements of the park make it not particularly attractive for the homeless).

The other thing is that as a well-situated urban park, it's used all year long, even in the winter the playgrounds are used.  And that we should have more staff in keeping with this demand.

Business districts address having greater needs than a city is prepared to provide by creating business improvement districts, which provide additional services, especially on "clean and safe issues" which is funded by a small tax on property in the defined geographical area of the district.

Parks can be funded similarly.  There is a property tax that helps to fund Bryant Park in NYC.  But a similar tax proposed for the High Line failed.  Not quite the same, SF has "green benefits districts" which fund public space improvements and maintenance.

What parks have as a form comparable to a BID is a conservancy, which raises money independent of the city and uses those funds to supplement funds that the city continues to provide for operations and capital improvements.  Generally, the conservancy is the lead on managing the park day to day.

The first entry goes into this in detail.

Tree climbing at Sugar House Park.

Other entries that are really specific to my experience are on using academic research and best practice to guide action on matters not covered by a master plan, planning art programs systematically, programming, including public art as a element of parks, using park architectural history as a way to guide building design issues, and managing the park as a cultural landscape:

e.g., Sugar House Park has six primary features defining the Park--what we call "Big Field" a large grassy bowl which abuts (2) Parley's Creek, (3) which in turn feeds Sugar House Pond, (4) the sledding hill, (5) the sledding hill on the east side of the park; together they illustrate that Sugar House Park is hilly compared to many other parks in the area, and (6) the view to the east of the Wasatch Front Mountains, although from some parts of the park the view to the west includes the Oquirrh Mountains.

The planning arts programs systematically entry is also very good.

Separately, I haven't written about it in the blog, but an article in the Washington Post, "Forget rest stops. Plan your road trip around playgrounds," gives us a lot to think about, especially because the park abuts I-80.  

It shapes the idea of having a visitor center on private property abutting the park--I wrote about that issue here, "Learnings from a recent zoning issue I've been involved in."

"Parks Week": Yesterday was National Public Lands Day

Parks Week.  I am calling this "Parks Week" because for the first time I will be attending the National Recreation and Parks Association national conference, in Philadelphia.  I hope to learn a lot and write some posts too.

National Public Lands Day is Today.  Throughout the year I collect stories relevant to National Public Lands Day, which is the last Saturday in September.  Sometimes I manage to publish a piece in advance, sometimes not.  This is pretty late in the day but just read something that blew me away even more, so here goes.

National Public Lands Day is focused on but not exclusively oriented to federal public lands.  There are many types: National Park Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA National Forests, Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation--dams, but often with recreational elements, the Army Corps of Engineers, dams some with recreational elements.

On this day, many federal installations have volunteer opportunities and entrance to federal public lands is free.

Some only some of the bad s*** Trump is doing to public lands

So the Trump Administration has been doing its best to f* up federal lands, and the supine Republican Congress seems to be just fine with it.  Of course, the year started out with Trump's face put on visitor passes.  

2.  I hope the Democrats make a law preventing a president from trying to put his name on f* everything.  This week there were reports that since he isn't getting his way with the Kennedy Center, nor the Institute of Peace--what a laugher, that there's consideration of renaming Ford's Theatre in DC--where Lincoln got shot!  Why the f* should his name have anything to do with it? ("Why does Trump want to name Lincoln assassination venue after himself? Dem strategist has a theory," AL.com).  Remember, every accusation by Trump is an admission ("Trump erupts after report claims aides want Ford Theatre renamed for him: ‘Ridiculous lie’s," NJ.com).

Parenthetically, a Canadian Substack, Dean Blundell's "Canada Versus Everybody," ("MAGA Is Losing The Senate And The House, But America Doesn't Get Its Allies Back Until Every Crook, Coward And Crypto Dollar Is Dragged Into Court") points out that the US will still not be trusted after Trump is gone unless there is true deep cleaning, on the scale of the Nuremberg Trials.  

He says that every time bad stuff happens, people get pardoned, so there are no long term repercussions and each bad administration takes it up another level.  An example is how Scooter Libby unveiled a CIA agent for political reasons and was convicted but then got pardoned.  He had an op-ed in the Washington Post this week, "America needs to destroy what really sustains the Iranian regime."  Not much of a punishment.

I'm fine with renaming all the toilets in federal buildings after Trump, along with sewage treatment centers and landfills, but that's it.  

3.  Whitewashing American History.  The Trump Administration has been "white washing" American History to diminish the stories and experiences of people who aren't white ("This article is more than 2 months old ‘A sanitized view of America’: inside Trump’s campaign to erase US history from national parks," Guardian), like Blacks and slavery--over the worry this could unduly hurt white people.  Talk about snowflakes.  The right calls the left snowflakes but they're the ultimate ("Are Conservatives the new snowflakes?," Free Press).

Workers remove displays from the President’s House Site in Independence National Historical Park. Tom Gralish / Staff Photographer

This started with interpretation boards at federal public lands, mostly National Parks, including the President's House in Philadelphia ("Slavery exhibits at the President’s House have been swapped for the Trump administration’s version," "Centuries of controversy at the President’s House," Philadelphia Inquirer) and now extends to the National Park Service, which controls the National Mall space on which Smithsonian Museums abut, putting up signs warning people about the false histories presented by the various Smithsonian Museums ("Trump administration plans ideological warning signs for Smithsonian," NPR).  Trump also wants an abstract sculpture replaced with a 30 foot tall George Washington. 

FWIW, this has been a conservative issue for decades, I wrote about it in 2008, "Dancing with the one that brung ya and challenging the dominant narrative." Then I termed it a battle between American hagiography and stories (e.g., George Washington and the cherry tree) and a deeper interpretation and narrative.  My joke was imagine if we reinterpreted the exhibits at the National Museum of American History in terms of American Imperialism.  

This time the White House released a report, Saving America's Story, which was countered by premier historians ("Historians Reject White House’s Criticism of Smithsonian Museum," New York Times).

Tired, the leader of the Smithsonian has resigned ("Why Lonnie Bunch Is Leaving the Smithsonian," Atlantic).  Even though Trump fired him when he canned board members at the Kennedy Center, I think David Rubenstein would be good.  He's not a cultural historian, but he funds culture and understands politics and turnaround situations ("Smithsonian leadership changes give Trump an opening for control," Post).

Photo: Jose Luis Magana/AP.

4.  (I forgot) The Reflecting Pool and DC Lands, Potomac Park golf course, the White House Ballroom and the Arch... and National Security.  Yes, Trump wants to makeover DC.  Earlier this summer we had the debacle of failed improvements to the Reflecting Pool, which he blamed on vandals.  It and big parts of the National Mall are fenced off.

He's put money into some improvements in what DC locals consider local parks but they are run by the NPS because of the federal relationships.  For years, many of us criticized the Park Service, partly because they are more focused on big national parks, but they do have a lot of knowledge still, it's just not been funded (Small Park Management Strategies, NPS).

So why the press and the rest of the country was critical about park entrance fees being diverted to DC, I thought it was okay because of the decades of under investing in NPS's DC installations ("National Park Entrance Fees Are Funding Trump’s D.C. Projects," NYT).

A banner in Logan Circle with a graffiti tag on it Wednesday May 5th, 2026. (Maxine Wallace/The Washington Post)

Of course, Trump had to put his name on the improvements, at least on banners ("Trump demands gratitude in D.C. So he put up banners thanking himself.," Post).  People fought back, as they have in terms of specious prosecutions, opposition to National Guardsmen in the city, etc.

Instagram photo from Popville.

I meant to write about the Ballroom debacle and the Arch but I haven't gotten around to it.  Trump appointed lackeys to the Commission on Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission, removing that level of what had once been judicious and careful oversight ("Trump has gotten rid of many of the checks and balances that could stop him from demolishing the Kennedy Center," Conversation).  

He tore down the White House Ballroom without authorization to build a much bigger one, intending for it to be paid "by contributors" (more grift) but with the American People with the final bill.  To get out of oversight he's claiming national security ("Trump’s Shoddy Ballroom Design Is the Real National Security Threat," New York Magazine).  Which isn't a winning argument so far.  But of course the Supreme Court lets construction continue despite the lawsuits.

Same with "the arch" a 250 foot monstrosity modeled after the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.  To get away with it he claims it can house snipers and drones so it's national security too ("Trump says his ballroom will house a drone port. The Secret Service has one next door," ABC-TV, "How Militarizing the Triumphal Arch Could Backfire for Trump," Atlantic). 

Pristine is not a word that marks Trump's treatment of golf courses.  

Caption: The East Potomac Park Golf Course is seen from the Washington Monument, Tuesday, Sept. 15, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The golf course at East Potomac Park was first targeted as a place for ballroom demolition construction debris.  Now he's taking that over too.  Again, the Department of Interior is his lapdog, plus NCPC, so there are no checks and balances ("Park Service quietly awards contracts to work on Trump’s takeover of East Potomac golf course," AP).

Signage in Washington, D.C., stating "The Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts" on June 11. Photo: Alex Wroblewski/AFP via Getty Images

5.  And the Kennedy Center.  This mess is pretty damning and widely covered ("How President Trump Broke the Kennedy Center, NYT, "What the Kennedy Center’s Tax Return Reveals," Atlantic).  

The latest is threats to demolish the building while they blame safety reasons they've known about and failed to address ("Kennedy Center put off planned repairs despite known structural issues, former employees allege," PBS).

6.  But hey, what about public lands?  How about the National Forests.  The Administration has already fired bunches of FS workers.  Now they are downsizing the department and moving it to Salt Lake, with the justification that it's closer to where most of the forests are ("The Forest Service is moving its federal HQ to Salt Lake City. Here’s why," Salt Lake Tribune, "Understanding The Forest Service Move To Utah," Flylords,) 

While taking other destructive measures ("U.S. Forest Service to Open Millions of Acres to Off-Road Vehicles, Memo Shows," "Trump Administration Moves to Allow Logging in National Forests," "Forest Service Will Close Research Stations That Study Wildfire Risk," New York Times).

Utah is the center of opposition to public lands under federal control ("Utah files ambitious lawsuit to take control of 18.5 million acres of federal public land," Utah News Dispatch, "Inside Utah’s PR campaign to seize public lands," HighCountry News, "Utah wants more control over federal lands. Here’s how lawmakers are advancing the fight," Salt Lake Tribune).

The reality is that there are national forests in 40 states and Puerto Rico, so a Western location is more about making it easier to f* with the lands.  

Besides the firing of workers, closing of offices, elimination of research programs, they are trying to open up forests to road building, when the prevailing authority is that forests should be wilderness where they can, hence no roads ("Trump administration moves to open untouched national forests to logging," NPR).

More Than Just Parks is a great Substack about public lands. Their coverage is astounding in its detail and insight.

Crowds hike their way up the Mist Trail, one of the more popular trails in Yosemite National Park. Photo: William Hale Irwin for the LA Times.

7.  Yosemite National Park in California.  It's well known that the parks experiencing the most visitors are overwhelmed.  Yosemite is one of them.  Not only did they fire a bunch of workers.  They ended the reservation system, so the park is overwhelmed still ("Crushing crowds turn Yosemite into ‘Disneyland.’ Can visitors still have fun?," Los Angeles Times).

To make it worse, the Trump Administration wants to give part of it to a private developer to enable them to monetize proximity to the Park ("Map shows where Yosemite developer wants to build private road," SFGate).  

The first Trump Administration tried to give a lot more concessions to the private sector in National Parks, but they didn't have enough time.  This Administration, mostly they've been too busy focused on eliminating workers, research programs, and checks on overtourism.

8.  WTF?  A baseball stadium in Grand Tetons National Park.  Ironically I was at that park a couple weeks ago.  

It's beautiful, and poking in the museum shop at the city history museum I came across some interesting books on its history--land was acquired by the Rockefellers and given to the federal government to create the park.  

The museum has a small but detailed and thorough thematic presentation of the history of the area, from the Native Americans to Hollywood and tourism, and how the recreation industry--skiing and whitewater rafting sectors--got their start in the Tetons.

We didn't see as much as the park I would have liked, but it's close, about a 4 hour drive.

Anyway, apparently Major League Baseball has the insane idea of desecrating a national park by playing a baseball game in one.  

My photos aren't as good as this.  Caption: A view of Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. (Daniel Slim/AFP/Getty Images).

Trump seems to think it would be fine at the Grand Tetons National Park (" Trump administration considers building baseball park in Grand Teton National Park that could host a Major League Baseball game." Post, "The real Field of Dreams: MLB has a new stadium opening—in an Iowa cornfield," Fortune).  

I don't think a fiction writer can come up with the narratives the Trump Administration performs in real life.

From the article:

An MLB official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the league approached the administration after the success of MLB’s other stand-alone events, such as the recurring Field of Dreams game in Iowa. The idea of playing a game in a national park is one of several that MLB is exploring.

... National Park Service Deputy Director Frank Lands visited Grand Teton National Park this week and looked at three potential locations for a baseball park within the park’s boundaries, the two people familiar with the matter said.

... A prized national park like Grand Teton is not an appropriate place for a baseball park, said Betsy Buffington, Northern Rockies regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group.

“It is irreplaceable. There is no other Grand Teton that is home to bears and wolves and bison, elk and pronghorn,” Buffington said in an interview. “So the idea that we would put a baseball stadium in Grand Teton National Park is just — what would the word be? — ludicrous. Crazy. Ridiculous. I mean, I just can’t fathom.”

Probably it would be a simple field, like the Field of Dreams stadium.  But it's still a desecration, and the transportation complexities of holding such an event there would be considerable.  The roads do not have that kind of special event capacity.  Plus it's just wrong, interfering with the principles of why National Parks exist.  From the law creating the National Park Service:

"....to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. 

 —National Park Service Organic Act; August 25, 1916

A baseball field is not congruent with the law guiding the creation and management of national parks. 

Photo: On the Road Facebook Page.  Driving through Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument from Kanab to Page, Arizona, on US 89A.

9.  Speaking of Utah, the Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments battle continues.  Republicans in the state were fine with the Trump Administration reducing the land reserved for the monument ("Utah Delegation Welcomes President Trump's Monument Proclamation," Rep. Celeste Maloy).  The Obama Administration increased it, after a many year public process, the first Trump Administration reversed, the second Trump Administration again reduced it.

(Brooke Larsen | The Salt Lake Tribune) Autumn Gillard and others protest President Donald Trump's shrinking of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Ecalante national monuments in St. George on Monday, July 20, 2026.

But a majority of the state's citizens prefer it remain as it was, and not be unreasonably developed ("Most Utahns want Trump’s cuts to Bears Ears, Grand Staircase reversed, survey finds," Salt Lake Tribune), which is the agenda of the State Government and the Utah Congressional Delegation. 

For example Utah's Senators were the leaders in the successful fight to reverse BLM's designation of conservation as a worthy use of public land under their purview, "Independent Petroleum Association of America backs Trump administration rollback of BLM public lands rule," World Oil, "Mining Claims Staked on Land That Trump Cut From Monuments," NYT).

10.  State Public Lands.  I haven't yet read The Other Public Lands: Preservation, Extraction, and Politics on the Fifty States' Natural Resource Lands by Steven Davis. It seems an essential book to understand the state side of public lands policy, the good and the bad.

Professor Davis also wrote In Defense of Public Lands: The Case against Privatization and Transfer, which these days is worth a read too.  We can call what the Trump Administration is doing as creeping privatization, if not in form, substance, where the private sector receives prioritized access with the aim of monetization of public lands for resource extraction, harmful recreation (off road vehicles), and monetization of park lands in surreptitious ways.

11.  City Public Lands.  Some cities are distinguishing between parks and other types of spaces in their organization of public parks agencies. 

For example, Salt Lake City's Department of Public Lands has seven separate units: planning, parks, trails and natural lands, urban forestry, recreation, the Salt Lake City Cemetery, and golf courses.

Hoover Dam, Nevada.  It turns out all the dams and hydroelectricity generation created in the 1930s became essential to powering US war production in Southern California and the Pacific Northwest.

12.  Are public waters "public lands"?  Meanwhile Bureau of Reclamation dams at Lake Powell and Lake Mead are reaching historic lows, which threatens their ability to generate electricity ("Lake Powell Hits Record Low and Lake Mead Could Fall Nearly 40 Feet, Straining Water for 40 Million," MedicalDaily).

National Trails Day: Saturday June 6th

The first Saturday of June is National Trails Day.  I think that it should be leveraged to promote trail use, volunteerism wrt cleanups, as a day to celebrate opening new trails, facilities, etc. ("Thousands of volunteers help maintain WA trails each year," Seattle Times).  

Too often it isn't.

The American Hiking Society is the lead, but federal agencies, at least they used to, like the National Park Service and the US Forest Service were big celebrants.  

Biking and walking access is a big part of trails and Trails Day events.

US Forest Service lands are free access on Trails Day.  They have a lot of volunteer and other events that day, all over the country.

National Parks aren't free that day.

1.  Last month, while doing park playground evaluation for a grant application, I realized besides most places not having enough signage calling attention to trails, that trail signage could be augmented with information/icons pointing people to nearby services like restrooms or air pumps--bike maps often do this, but not signs.

-- "May is National Bicycle Month | More on the concept of adding services icons to bicycle route wayfinding signage"

2.  Years ago, I was blown away by a trail study for Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) Ohio (Cuyahoga Greenways Plan) that did demographic studies about the increased range of jobs made available through the expansion of trail networks.  

I haven't stayed in close touch with bike planning best practice over the past few years, but I think this plan is definitely worth reading in terms of how it lays out goals and evaluation criteria for route selection, and even branding!

3. The basic idea is building a network for cycling.  I like the way an old German National Bicycle Plan illustrated the point.

I'm still proud of the concepts I developed many years ago in creating the Western Baltimore County Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Plan in terms of the scales at which to focus the development of bicycle and walking infrastructure ("Extending the "Signature Streets" concept to "Signature Streets and Spaces""):

• within neighborhoods
• one mile radius from schools and bus stops and transit stations
• three mile radius from "town centers"
• along corridors
• between corridors
• connections within and to parks, which I called a County bikeway network
• connections to neighboring jurisdictions (Baltimore County has borders with Baltimore City, Anne Arundel County, Howard County, Carroll County and Harford County in Maryland, and York County in Pennsylvania.

4.  With regard to trails as networks and infrastructure, urban trails can be particularly good at connecting neighborhoods to parks, libraries, shopping districts, grocery stores, schools and other civic assets.  The Northwest Branch Trail in Prince George's County does this very well--and it's the first trail that I really rode on that made me realize the value of trails versus street riding.

On the street, so much of your mental energy is occupied on defensive cycling.  You can drop a lot of that when riding trails, except for gauging the movement of pedestrians, little kids, dogs, roller bladers, scooter riders, skateboarders, etc.

On the Baltimore and Annapolis Trail and the Indianapolis Cultural Trail, brewpubs in Iowa, etc. many businesses have opened rear entries to link to the adjoining trail.

The patio and 606 Trail access point at Wolf & Company in Bucktown. Credit: Quinn Myers/Block Club Chicago.

In Chicago, the Wolf and Company restaurant is the first company to have placed a restaurant entry on  the 606 Trail.  

They specifically chose that building because it could support multiple concepts, including the trail.

Ironically, the 606 Trail was created to serve a lower income area of Chicago ("Lessons from The 606," DePaul University Institute of Housing Studies) but the Bucktown neighborhood where the restaurant is, is decidedly upscale.

The top floor is a cafe with coffee, tea and other drinks.

The bottom floor, 1752 N. Western Avenue opens to the street and neighborhood, with a full service restaurant, bar and market ("Bloomingdale Trotters Should Beware of Wolves, Not Foxes, Along the 606," Eater).

With a butcher case like this, and prices to match, the market is definitely a lot more than a typical convenience store focused on selling snacks and soda.

So Wolf & Company is three concepts: cafe; restaurant and bar; and upscale market, in one, connecting both to the 606 Trail and the Bucktown neighborhood.

5.  Speaking of branding, how about Promoting Bikeway Networks through Postcards?  The Alta Trail Map postcard below pictures their trails for winter skiing.  I like the icons they use to denote the various amenities at different trailheads.  Ski resorts promote mountain biking in summers as a way to build revenue off-season, and publish trail maps.

Relatedly, the Ketchum Idaho Visitor Center has trail maps posted on its walls.  As do some other groups.  But rarely bicycle shops.

6.  Not trails per se, but bikeways, Salt Lake is really doing a lot of great work ("Recent study cites Salt Lake City as one of the nation's safest metro areas for bicycling," Cache Valley Daily), even though its program to add sustainable mobility infrastructure to the city's streets has been stymied and preempted by the Utah State Legislature--legislators complain that bikeways make it hard for them to drive to the Capitol ("Utah Senate approves bill that blocks Salt Lake City's street improvement work," Salt Lake City Weekly).

7.  Besides the drying up of federal funding for sustainable mobility infrastructure ("Cities Losing Federal Support for Bike and Walking Infrastructure," Governing, "USDOT’s historic failure to advance any new transit projects in 14 months may be a sign of things to come," Transportation for America) and fortunately most states and localities are maintaining their commitments to biking and walking (and can't afford to cover federal government funding for transit) ... 

8.  the biggest issue in bicycle planning to me is not the development, construction and implementation of infrastructure and facilities, but providing the assistance people need to make the transition from automobile-centricity to biking.

I write about that here:

-- "Revisiting assistance programs to get people biking: 26 programs"

9.  Secure bicycle parking networks operating at the metropolitan scale.  But while #24 is Provision of secure bicycle parking, and lockers and showers in destination districts.  Zoning requirements to build them in office buildings and campuses of a certain size.  Or as a proffer/ community benefit.

I failed to call out specifically the need for secure bicycle parking networks.  That means 27 points.  This covers the topic:

-- "If you're going to promote electric bikes at scale, there needs to be complementary investment in secure bicycle parking and charging" (2023)
-- "Bike to Work Day as an opportunity to assess the state of bicycle planning: Part 2, building a network of bike facilities at the regional scale" (2017)

Rennes, France does a good job with regional secure bike parking ("National Bicycle Month | Rennes, France: a national model").  Other European cities too.

10.  E-bikes can help a lot.  Years ago I was critical about e-biking, because I thought "regular" bikes worked in cities--especially in flat areas--just fine ("(Still) tired of mis-understanding of the potential for e-bikes."

E-bikes have the added benefit of 

1. extending the distance people are willing to commute by bike
2. making it easier for aging seniors to continue biking
3. making it easier to bike in hilly conditions
4. making a bicycle trip more competitive with car travel in terms of time, so that people actually switch trips from a car to a bike.

From Reddit. An Amazon e-bike vehicle making deliveries in DC.  Although some worry about such vehicles blocking bike lanes. 

11.  Making cycling irresistible. But my earlier position on "the right way to use electric bikes" made me remember job isn't to make plans about how I think people should bike.  It should be about building the conditions to make bicycling irresistible 

-- "Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany," Transport Reviews (2008).  

I used that paper as the foundation for this piece, which was commissioned at the time by the DC Bicycle Advisory Committee in response to a Rails to Trails Conservancy initiative.   

-- "Ideas for making bicycling irresistible in Washington DC" (2008)  

In writing, I made the point that DC is urban and should lay out an urban agenda for biking, as opposed to the more suburban and rural biking "sense" of the rails to trails movement.

I see one of the ideas, delivery services using bike-based vehicles is just now being implemented in DC.

12.  E-bikes and cargo bikes help people shift trips to and from school from car to bike. ("Small But Mighty: Electric Bicycles Can Bridge the Gap in Access to Transportation," National Laboratory of the Rockies, "Study finds that once people use cargo bikes, they like their cars much less," ArsTechnica).

13.  E-bike voucher programs are quick to fill up.  I didn't even know about the latest one in Utah ("Utah E-Bike Program offers $800 vouchers to qualified residents," ABC4).  It opened on June 1st.  Was full before the end of the day on June 3rd.

I like the usually these programs provide more support for those of lesser means.  But I think that they should be loan deductible programs like in in England or Ireland.   Sometimes, they are funded through carbon tax programs and similar kinds of impact fees.

14.  E-bikes on trails (and beaches) can be problematic.  On trails it is because they are faster than people on foot or regular bike.  And certain types of e-vehicles aren't bicycles, but more akin to motorcycles ("Iowa City needs a nuanced conversation about e-bikes," Iowa City Press-Citizen, "Iowa cities team up to promote e-bike safety on trails and sidewalks," Iowa Public Radio/NPR, "E-bikes are all over mountain trails. Some want them banned," "In the South Bay, e-bikes are restricted along the beach. Yet they’re still everywhere," Los Angeles Times, "Moab Opened 200 Miles of Trail to E-Bikes. I Was One of the First to Ride Them (Legally)," Outside).  From the first article:

Anyone who regularly uses Iowa City trails has likely seen the tension already developing: riders moving too quickly through crowded pedestrian areas, oversized throttle-powered bikes built more like motorcycles than bicycles, and parents purchasing machines online without realizing they may exceed Iowa’s legal definition of an e-bike. 

A sign posted at a trail entrance to the Aliso Wood Canyon Wilderness Park 

in Aliso Viejo, California restricts e-bike usage.

That matters because Iowa City has spent decades building trails designed to function as shared public spaces. Pedestrians, runners, wheelchair users, cyclists and families with strollers all use the same network. That system works because speed differences remain relatively manageable and predictable. A 12 mph difference matters on a crowded trail. A 30 mph difference changes the character of a shared trail completely. 

Unfortunately, the public conversation often collapses into two extremes. Either all e-bikes are treated as dangerous, or any discussion of regulation is dismissed as anti-bike hysteria. Both reactions miss the point. Most e-bike riders are responsible, and many are exactly the kind of people cities should want out of cars and onto trails. E-bikes reduce traffic, parking demand, and transportation barriers for people who might not otherwise ride at all. At the same time, it is reasonable to acknowledge that high-speed electric motorcycles do not belong on crowded recreational paths simply because they have pedals attached.

Ketcham, Idaho.

15.  Suggestion: Create a senior bike purchase deduction program from the social security benefits program.  I recently suggested Medicare could do this for seniors ("The "new" Washington Post editorial page blows a chance to be innovative | Nudging versus "nannyism" and senior health care"), but instead of deducting from your payroll check, from your Social Security check.  

There is clear value for promoting senior biking as a fitness measure.  Let's make it easy.  People with lower incomes could get a match--the check doesn't go all that far for many and i can be difficult to save up for big expenditures.

16.  Speaking of seniors, we need to have programs that promote walking and biking as people age.  Some senior centers and organizations do this on a national best practice basis ("Freewheelers: Old Spokes Bicycle Club," Philadelphia Inquirer).  Apparently there is a similarly named Old Spokes group in Calgary.  

Baltimore County Office of Aging sponsors a Cycling Seniors program.  Etc.

A couple years ago, Washington Area Bicyclists Association did an active transportation expo for seniors.  

I think all senior center programs should develop and implement similar kinds of programs.

17.  Acknowledge and respond to climate change.  Trails should consider adding push button mister stations to deal with the heat.  

Water stations where they can be installed, based on access to utilities.

Add shade structures and tree plantings.  With the aim that over decades, the trees become tall enough to provide significant shade.

A mister on a playground.  

 

Man peeing in hiding because there are no restrooms

This man is stopping to pee in the trees on Jordan River Parkway at 1700 South in Salt Lake City.  This is a vote for those Throne restrooms.

The funny thing is with the new restrooms at Glendale Regional Park, no more than one mile behind him, he could have peed there.

But unless you know the park, which is brand new and in fact parts are still under construction, you wouldn't know because there isn't pedestrian or bicycle wayfinding signage on 1700 South that lists restrooms.

It makes me realize more than ever we need to add restroom proximity to wayfinding signage.

There is wayfinding signage on the Jordan River Parkway--although it's often out of date as here it points to "The Waterpark" as a destination and that's now the Glendale Regional Park.  It could highlight the restroom too.  It can be words like on the sign below, or the pictograms used in highway wayfinding signage systems.

Top: Jordan River Parkway Sign.  Wayfinding signage, Pioneer Historic Byway, Soda Springs, Idaho

Middle Top: new restroom at Glendale Regional Park.

Middle Bottom:  pictogram signage, Eight Dollar Mountain & Jeffery Pine Loop Trail, BLM

Bottom: Legend, Bicycle Map, Iowa State Dept of Transportation.  Wayfinding sign, Salesforce Park, SF

But there isn't signage like that on bike routes.  But it would be easy to do by adding it to the bottom of a sign, reserving the bottom section of the sign for "services."  I'm pretty sure I thought about that when writing about "Making Cycling Irresistible" but it's been almost 20 years.

The Throne automated restroom could be perfect for other spots on the trail.  

I don't love their design which could feel discordant in a nature setting.  But maybe just having a nature focused mural on three sides would make it fit better.

They are good because they're small and they don't need expensive connections to the water and sewage networks.  They have that self contained through tanks, albeit they have to be emptied and refilled regularly.

National Public Lands Day: Saturday September 27th, 2025

One of the downsides of all the drugs I take is I have to pee frequently (to reduce fluid on the lungs). So while traveling recently, we stopped at the Bonneville Dam in Oregon. What a site. (I'm glad we stopped there instead of a travel plaza!)

charlie recommended I read Cadillac Desert, a book on Western water issues, it's a great book.  

One of the many points is that the creation of dams in the 1930s in the Pacific Northwest, part for flooding, part of rural electrification, part a New Deal jobs program, ended up being an essential part of the WWII manufacturing effort, by producing gobs of cheap electricity, which helped to cheapen the cost of aluminum, among others.

Bonneville Dam is one of the federal installations considered public lands--National Park Service, US Forest Service (Department of Agriculture, US Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of the Interior), Bureau of Reclamation dam and recreation sites (Interior), and Army Corps of Engineers--navigable rivers, locks, dams, and related recreation areas, that will be honoring National Public Lands Day, held the fourth Saturday in September, with a volunteer activity.

Looking at the sluiceways, I was struck by how the FDR Administration and others built great things ("Let’s make every day National Public Lands Day," Environment America), while the Trump Administration is more focused on the destruction of government ("White House begins plan for mass firings if there’s a government shutdown," Washington Post).

Last year, volunteers on NPLD at NPS installations provided more than 41,000 hours of service, and they got a free entry pass to use later, for visiting an NPS site.  

Some states and local governments also hold events celebrating public lands ("EP Public Lands Day event is part of Minnesota Master Naturalist program," Eden Prairie Local News, "Fall River State Park celebrates National Public Lands Day with 23rd annual Rendezvous," Butler County [KS] Times-Gazette, "Celebrate Wyoming Public Lands Day by committing to protect them," Wyoming News-Tribune, "Chattanooga Parks And Outdoors Celebrates National Public Lands Day," Chattanooga Pulse).

Usually Public Lands Day is a free visitation day ("National Parks That Usually Charge Fees Are Free This Weekend," Outside Magazine).

This Daily Telegraph article is about lessons for British National Parks from other countries. But it's a really great scintillation of issues more generally. Good advice for all types of parks.

1. Reduce farmland and ban grouse shooting
2. Create leisure-friendly infrastructure 
3. Devise and enforce strict rules for all.
4. Invest in public transport 
5. Control the flow of visitors
6. Ban dogs 
7. Ditch the “National Landscapes” moniker
8. Think beyond the hills
9. Build in winter resilience 
10. Aim High

1.  Wildfires aren't limited to public lands, but are a big issue while the Trump Administration refuses to acknowledge climate change ("Next Thanksgiving, Smokey Bear should talk about climate change," Los Angeles Times, "Trump’s Attack on Government Capacity Will Fan the Flames of the Home Insurance Crisis," American Prospect).

Photo: Hank Van Denberg, Colorado Public Radio.

2.  NPS and Forest Service cutbacks and public billboard campaign ("Meet the Volunteers Who Help Keep U.S. National Parks and Public Lands Running," New York Times, "Overflowing toilets, trash heaps plague Washington hiking hot spots," San Francisco Chronicle, "US Forest Service and National Park Service to fire thousands of workers," Guardian, "National Park Service staff told to downplay record-breaking visitor stats," San Francisco Chronicle).

Although parks seemed to have weathered the cutbacks this past summer ("National parks appear to have weathered summer tourism storm despite cuts," USA Today).  From the article:

While there have been isolated reports of problems, visitors saw few systemic issues. Instead, they marveled at redwoods and giant sequoias, hiked through slot canyons and up Yosemite's Half Dome, snapped photos of elk and moose in Rocky Mountain National Park, and watched the stars swirl overhead at Agate Fossil Beds National Monument in Nebraska.

And there's also no evidence that routine maintenance has ground to a halt. Among other items, federal purchasing records show projects underway to buy 40 new picnic tables in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, paint a cedar shingle roof at James A. Garfield National Historic Site, and buy two new snowblowers for Crater Lake National Park.

A billboard in downtown Duluth criticizes cuts to national parks, including Voyageurs, paid for by new pro-labor news outlet More Perfect Union. Now, historians worry about the signs you won't see in national parks as the Trump administration urges visitors to report signs that cast American history in an unflattering light. (Jana Hollingsworth/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

However, as the value of previous investments in parks are consumed, this is not likely to continue ("More than 425 popular campsites across Pa. are closed indefinitely due to DOGE cuts," Philadelphia Inquirer, "Trump Is Setting the National Parks Up to Fail," Atlantic).  From the Atlantic:

But rangers say the real crisis is happening beyond the trails and campgrounds, where visitors can’t see it. Park employees’ experiences, which several people described to me and dozens more have shared publicly, suggest that the Department of the Interior sacrificed long-term stewardship of American lands to maintain a veneer of normalcy for this summer’s crowds. “We are really pulling out all the stops to make sure that the impacts are being hidden,” an emergency-services ranger in the western United States told me. (She and other park employees I spoke with for this story requested anonymity, out of fear of losing their job.)

The National Park Service lost about a quarter of its permanent staff to mass firings, buyouts, early retirements, and resignations this winter and spring. In April, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum made the department’s priorities for the remaining staff clear: In an order, he declared that parks had to stay “open and accessible” and “provide the best customer service experience for all visitors.” Any facility closures or reduced hours would need to be approved by NPS and Department of Interior leadership in Washington. The order alluded to the general importance of conservation but showed little interest in research, monitoring, or maintenance.

... All of that research required an army of employees, many of whom are now out of a job. Ryan Valdez, the senior director of conservation science at the nonprofit National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), told me that the Park Service’s science arm, which once employed hundreds of people in land, water, air, wildlife, and climate-change programs, is “pretty much dismantled.”

Through a public billboard campaign,, the progressive news outlet More Perfect Union called on citizens to contact Congress about these transgressions ("Duluth billboards blast DOGE cuts to Voyageurs National Park," MST, "These billboards celebrate America’s national parks to call out DOGE cuts," Yello).

Shot in 1863, "Scourged Back" was a key image in abolitionists' anti-slavery campaigns during the American Civil War. McPherson & Oliver/National Gallery of Art. From the CNN story, "‘Scourged Back’ exposed the horror of slavery. Now it’s embroiled in America’s censorship debate."

3. Battle over interpretation of "bad moments" in American history ("Park Service Is Ordered to Take Down Some Materials on Slavery and Tribes," New York Times). "National parks remove signs about climate, slavery and Japanese detention," Washington Post, "No matter how hard he tries, Trump’s effort to rewrite Black history can’t last," Philadelphia Inquirer, "National parks agency tight-lipped over changes to Charleston sites as Trump removal deadline passes," Charleston Post & Courier, "From slavery to pollution, National Park employees flagged material deemed ‘disparaging’ to US," AP).

The right calls the left 'woke,' crybabies about policies and practices.  The right is the woke side, afraid of the reality of history ("A walk through a Smithsonian museum reveals American genius and cruelty as Trump presses for change," AP, How park visitors responded when asked to report anti-American signs," Washington Post).

People walk past an informational panel at President's House Site Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2025, in Philadelphia.  (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Garbage spilling out of an outhouse near Beehive Reservoir in Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest. Photo: U.S. Forest Service.

4.  Various anti-public land measures by the Trump Administration aim to extract resources, not promote conservation ("After national parks hearing, MAGA forces continue public land assault, greens say," WyoFile).

As Congress conducted a high-profile hearing in Grand Teton National Park 10 days ago to support parks funding, President Donald Trump’s administration and supporters were busy elsewhere eliminating public land protections across the West.

Those attacks include Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ move to rescind the Forest Service roadless rule that protects 59 million roadless acres considered vital to wildlife. Also, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum issued an order restricting use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which was created in 1964 to buy and preserve recreation lands. ("Interior Department changing conservation funding rules, what it can go toward and who can participate," Colorado Public Radio)

Meantime, the U.S. House on Sept. 3 put on the chopping block a Bureau of Land Management plan in Montana that restricted coal leasing. If agreed to by the Senate, the bill would open the door to “legal and regulatory chaos” across the West, the Center for Western Priorities warned.

And on Thursday, the BLM opened comment on the plan to roll back its Public Lands Rule that gave conservation an equal footing with industrial uses of property owned by all Americans. ("Trump administration moves to kill Biden-era Public Lands Rule for Bureau of Land Management," Summit Daily, "Trump administration wants to cancel Biden-era rule that made conservation a 'use' of public land," AP).

The administration and its supporters characterized the changes as necessary to help reduce the federal deficit, rectify allegedly unlawful policies and increase energy production, among other things.

In 1982, conceptual artist Agnes Denes planted and harvested a two-acre field of wheat on a rubble-strewn landfill in Lower Manhattan, located just a few blocks from Wall Street and the World Trade Center, for her incredible project Wheatfield – A Confrontation. 

The work was commissioned by the Public Art Fund and took four months to complete. Denes and her team meticulously prepared the infertile landfill, bringing in soil, digging 285 furrows by hand, and planting the seeds. For months, they tended to the field, maintaining an irrigation system, weeding, and fertilizing. The effort culminated in a successful harvest, yielding over 1,000 pounds of golden wheat. 

Congressional Review Act "House Republicans’ Use of Little-Known Law to Strike Down Public Land Plans Could Be Pandora’s Box Moment,"

5.  Some states aim to monetize public lands too ("Michigan plans to clear 400+ acres of state forest near Gaylord for solar farm ," MLive).  From the article:

This comes as the DNR faces dwindling revenues from hunting and fishing licenses, and Michigan falls behind building enough renewable energy fast enough to risk not meeting a key state climate goal – 100% clean energy by 2040. Leasing 4,000 acres of public land statewide is part of the DNR’s plan to help remedy both problems in coming years. Officials said that state solar initiative may begin just west of Gaylord.

6.  Republican efforts to sell off public lands continue | Now the justification is for building housing ("Mike Lee says selling public lands will solve the West’s housing crisis. Past sales show otherwise," Utah News Dispatch, "Utah’s High-Stakes PR Campaign to Wrest Control of Public Lands," Mother Jones, "Utah is funding a media campaign to support its public lands lawsuit," Salt Lake Tribune, "Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails," Stateline, "Across the West, a pitch to lower housing costs: Sell federal land," Washington Post, "How Seriously Should We Take the Sale of Federal Lands? Very Seriously, Experts Say," Outdoor Life).

In an essay for Bloomberg ("The US Government Is Sitting on a Possible Solution to the Housing Crisis") the author of Land Power ("Land, The First Frontier: An Interview with Michael Albertus about “Land Power”," Chicago Review of Books) makes the point that most public lands don't lend themselves to housing, despite the claims by people like Senator Mike Lee.  But he suggests some land does meet the criterion.

The trouble is that many federal lands are not attractive for development or have other important uses, including outdoor recreation, wilderness habitat preservation and forestry, as well as livestock grazing and mineral and energy extraction. Much of the terrain is too rugged for building or too far from the places where people want to live. That’s especially true of the vast expanses of arid land in the West, where most federal land is located. Many developers have made a similar point: The chief housing problem is that affordable homes are not available in the most attractive places to live, which are typically dynamic cities.

The idea of building whole cities from scratch in the middle of nowhere is unattractive to most homebuyers, who want to live where there are ample economic opportunities, services and cultural activities. Instead, the Trump administration should focus on identifying federal parcels of land within or adjacent to metropolitan areas that could be transformed into housing.

A considerable amount of property meets this criterion. One study found that in Utah alone, the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) own 217,000 acres within the boundaries of cities. Another 650,000 acres of federal land—excluding national parks, military bases and areas with other congressional protections—are located within a mile of Utah city boundaries. In a state where new homebuilding permits have hovered at 30,000 a year, that’s sufficient acreage to keep developers busy for decades.

7.  States with a true environmental ethic do not support rolling back public lands ("These Oregon natural areas could be logged, developed if Trump rescinds roadless rule," Portland Oregonian, "Why public lands should stay public and protected," Los Angeles Times, "WA forests are too complex for ‘cut or don’t cut’ thinking," Seattle Times) ("This Land Is My Land: Inside the Growing Movement to Fight Conservation," Mother Jones) while conservative states do.

From the LAT:

The federal government manages natural resources on the “public lands” across the nation as a kind of “commons” on behalf of all Americans. So regardless of where you live, you are part-owner of 640 million acres — roughly 28% of the country — protected as public lands. The vast majority of these holdings (about 95%) are managed by the “Big Four” agencies: the Bureau of Land Management (245 million acres), the U.S. Forest Service (193 million acres), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (95 million acres), and the National Park Service (85 million acres).

The evolution of this vast, shared domain commenced in the wake of the American Revolution, when the new nation’s territorial appetite proved insatiable. After just 70 years, the continental outline of the United States looked as it does today. For this ever-ambitious republic, the key to extending American sovereignty from sea to shining sea was control over the land itself.

To transfer public lands into private hands efficiently, Congress passed a series of laws: the Homestead Act, the General Mining Act, the Desert Land Act and the Timber and Stone Act, for example. While these efforts unleashed a white tide of settlement on federal and unprotected Native lands, privatization also wreaked ecological havoc.

Photo: Spencer Heaps, Utah News Dispatch.

Historian Vernon Parrington called this giveaway “the Great Barbecue.” “Congress had rich gifts to bestow,” he argued, “in lands, tariffs, subsidies, favors of all sorts; and when influential citizens made their wishes known to the reigning statesmen, the sympathetic politicians were quick to turn the government into the fairy godmother the voters wanted it to be.”

After the Civil War, the federal government continued to promote Western settlement and resource extraction with little oversight or regulation. But the commodification of the nation’s beavers, bison, whales, old-growth forests, salmon, elk, grizzlies, wolves and agricultural lands to supply an insatiable global market finally prompted a former Interior Department secretary to lament that Americans were “a spendthrift people recklessly wasting [their] heritage” and saddled with “a government careless of the future.”

 8.  Park transportation and access.  In many places, parks and public lands aren't necessarily accessible to people who don't have a car.  

I've written a proposal for a 'recreation transportation district' for Salt Lake County to provide access to public lands.  

With a couple exceptions, like a winter ski bus, public transit to public lands--mostly the Uinta-Wasatch- Cache National Forest--isn't available.  (USFS keeps merging forests because of lack of funds.)  

There are federal transportation programs for parks, but they could be adopted on a more widespread basis ("Ditch the car: how to visit America's national parks without the congestion," Guardian).

I've got a mostly written blog entry on this, from a long time ago, that I'll try to finish for publication tomorrow.

Western railroad passenger tourism was built on visitation to the national parks, before there was even a national park system.

While suggestions for Britain, these recommendations are worthy of all ("Tourism transport in the UK is a mess – here's how to fix it," Daily Telegraph).

1. Frequent hybrid and electric minibuses
2. Regular electric trains from rural areas
3. A national tram network
4. E-bike roads
5. One-way rural roads and coastal access lanes
6. Expand slow ways (support walking)
7. Canal services
8. River and bay crossings [I'd add bridge crossings too]
9. All-user access.  Cities, national parks, lakesides, canal paths, museums and high streets need to be fully accessible to all, whatever their mobility needs and abilities. We’re all getting older, and there will be many more older than younger people in years to come. Any path or porch or doorway that can’t be entered on wheels or with a stick should be yellow-taped and closed until it is.
10. Short-haul ships to the EU