Why Large Parks
Or
The Fever of Protected Places.

For some people the large parks idea may be hard to see… but just look deeper and you will see it. Sometimes, if you have been raised in big cities or farm areas you will see this concept better because your land is so developed, apart from the UP. Here in the UP we have the last potentially protected places in the Heartland of America.

It is a fact that large public parks, very large parks, attract city people…. including those with money. This is because their own bed has already been despoiled.
They want an opportunity to enjoy the outdoors close to its original condition. They find this nature best in places that are considered “protected.” Such places are known by
reputation.

Reputation is a key word. It is a marketing concept, too. The reputation of a Protected Place is of a quieter place, an undeveloped place, a natural place, a place of clean water and clear air, uncontaminated soils, many trees that grow, even bugs that bite, and in our case deep snow.

Famous examples of Protected Places are our national parks---large tracts of relatively
untouched land. These parks remind us of the way our frontier life used to be. We want to see a glimpse of such. A book could be written about what Protected Places mean to us
in our busy modern world. (not perceived locally, but instead nationally)

Now, businesses as well as tourists are attracted to Protected Places. To live and work near such places enhances the quality of life. Business owners want to be around these
places, raise their children here, live in town and have a camp…just like Youppers have.

So to be around these huge Protected Places business owners will bring their money and ideas for society, including ideas for investment. They want to be accepted by you good people (the Youppers), so they will give you opportunities for a job. These jobs may take some training or education, and further some of these jobs would be suitable for even high schoolers.

It creates a fever of success: money begets money. This, my fellow U.P. residents, is what we need for jobs.

It is growth, I acknowledge, but most of the people I talk with want growth and job opportunities to an extent. So let’s steer this growth, make our choices, rather than leave the decisions to new reservoir companies owners, factory farm operators, the sulfide mining industry, and others that don’t understand our way of life.

The following data is a collection I’ve put together to help understand the economic strength and vitality of Protected Places.




I want to support the idea and fact that the creation of large parks benefits the adjoining acres and provides gradual growth for neighboring communities, as opposed to communities deteriorating as is expressed by some in Michigan.

To prove this idea, please refer to www.umt.edu/econ/papers.htm
The author's name is Tom Powers, an economics professor at the University of Montana. This web site is full of articles containing studies and research about wilderness preservation, parks, monuments, etc. Examples are:
1. Economic Impact of Nature-based Tourism. A discussion at Bay Mills in the Upper Peninsula.
2. Making a case for wilderness in the community: it’s good business. Below are excerpts from The economics of Wildland Preservation.
Page 23 of 27: "Economic research has repeatedly demonstrated that areas with high quality natural environments that are protected by official wilderness or park status have been able to attract higher levels of economic activity. As a result, those areas show signs of superior economic vitality. Much of that research has centered on the Western United States because of the concentration there of many of the larger National Parks and wilderness areas, but other areas of the nation including the northern forests of the nation's northeastern tier have also been studied. Other studies are national in scope."
Another excerpt from page 24: "the more of the land base that was in National Wilderness, Parks, Monuments, etc, the higher were the measures of local economic vitality."
Next paragraph: "growth rates two to six times those of both other non- metropolitan areas… his research clearly indicated that the protected lands drew new residents who were willing to sacrifice a certain amount of income in order to live in the higher quality natural environments that they perceived federal protected landscapes provided"
Next paragraph: "the closer a location was to a designated Wilderness Area, the higher the likelihood of new construction"
And a few lines later: "Another economist seeking to understand the spatial patterns of economic development in the rural Mountain West also focused on the tension between access to urban areas and closeness to protected natural areas"


Top of page 25: "Vermont’s Green Mountains revealed that the existence of designated federal Wilderness enhanced nearby land values"
Next paragraph: "The study, like many others, found that, in general, jobs were following people’s residential location decisions rather than people passively moving to where employment opportunities were."
Next page: "including high rates of population, job, and real income growth…
robust economic vitality."
Next paragraph: "A study of the impact of state parks on employment and population growth in 250 rural Western counties found that state parks also served as an amenity, attracting population and supporting employment growth."
Next paragraph: "these studies also confirm that people care where they live and act on those preferences, leading to in-migration and job creation in areas perceived to have higher quality living environments."

3. "Protected landscapes and economic Prosperity, A 21 century economic vision for North Dakota"
4. The economic Impact of Preserving Washington's Roadless Forests.
5. The Local Economic Impact of changes in National Grasslands Management in North Dakota
6. On another part of his web site is another article titled "Declaring an End to New Wilderness Protection"
The following is quoted: "Even more telling, the larger the percentage of protected public land in a Western county, the faster the rate of growth has been. The causal connection is the opposite of what the oilmen in control of the nation claim: The more carefully we protect the natural landscapes that define the West, the more economic vitality the local economy shows.
These economic facts, however, are unlikely to be convincing to those who accept as an article of faith that the only way to show respect for the natural wonders that God has given us is to destroy them in the pursuit of corporate profits."

My opinion and 30 year’s experience with land here in the U.P. confirms this man’s statements. I have seen repeatedly (over and over) the demand on own land bordering Protected Places. The prices are higher and the demand, greater. Actually, it is hard to buy land bordering a park of some kind. To me, it is obvious to see.


From : The Economic Impact of the Proposed Maine Woods National Park and Preserve by Powers again, page 83
"Only about a quarter of the slowly expanding jobs wold be "tourist" jobs. The other three-quarter would be associated with new permanent residents and businesses drawn by the natural amenities. In that sense this would represent true diversification, not just the expansion of the existing tourist sectors."