OCR Text |
Show Master plan for state parks system needed Completion of a master plan for Utah's state parks system should be given the highest priority. This was one of the suggestions contained in a study of the state parks system by Utah Foundation, the private tax research organization. Because such a master plan has not been used in the past as the basis of determining needs and allocating funds, Utah's park system has grown somewhat haphazardly. Many of the parks were created mainly by the desire to have a particular site included includ-ed in the state park system without regard to its suitability or to future financing of the park site. The Foundation points out that a long-range master plan is especially needed now because of the extremely tight budget situation facing the state during the next few years. Only with such a plan can the limited resources be put to the best possible use. The Division of Parks and Recreation reports that they currently are working work-ing on developing such a master plan. Utah was one of the last states to create a state park system in 1957. Over the past 25 years. Utah has expended ex-pended S55.7 million on state park development, with another $22.3 million being spent on maintenance and administration. The present system consists of 47 sites providing a wide variety of scenic, historic, and recreational attractions. While some of the sites have been extensively developed, others have remained largely undeveloped and have a limited attraction. According to the Foundation, the state park system is one of the attractions attrac-tions used to lure tourists to the state. A recent report of the Institute of Outdoor Out-door Recreation and Tourism indicated in-dicated that more than $600 million is spent annually on outdoor recreation in Utah, with about $65 million of this amount expended while on outings to state parks. It was estimated that trips to state parks generate $4.6 million per year in state and local taxes (mainly gasoline and sales taxes). Most of the revenue used to finance park and recreation costs comes from state appropriation of general tax funds. During recent vears h increased attention has been evtr obtaining greater financial l!'" tion by those who use parkaL c tion facilities. recr' During the 1981-82 fiscal revenue generated from user' ' registrations, concessions anH ' '' sources ( including boating and i tional vehicle fees) totaled sto ' or 44.2 percent of the amounted amount-ed for operations and mainte T 1 Most of the administration ! development costs continue borne by the general taxpayer For the most part, the sUteh,-entered sUteh,-entered the business of providS lodging, vending and marina at state parks. Where such ac.S do occur, they usually are prof private concessionaires. Fomd-analysts Fomd-analysts point out that a 19rw"l': the State Legislature Auditor"' criticized certain concession" and recommended better mar. ment in the enforcement, analv administration of contracts i concessionaries. i |