The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings

<p> Carry in/ Carry out (CICO) policies have been used in front-country parks for a long time. According to the National Park Service (2013), &ldquo;trash free parks&rdquo; are ones that implement carry in and carry out policies; the manager of a park removes all or most of the garbage...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Powers, Sarah A.
Language:EN
Published: State University of New York Col. of Environmental Science & Forestry 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10273538
id ndltd-PROQUEST-oai-pqdtoai.proquest.com-10273538
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-PROQUEST-oai-pqdtoai.proquest.com-102735382017-06-15T16:06:51Z The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings Powers, Sarah A. Natural resource management|Recreation <p> Carry in/ Carry out (CICO) policies have been used in front-country parks for a long time. According to the National Park Service (2013), &ldquo;trash free parks&rdquo; are ones that implement carry in and carry out policies; the manager of a park removes all or most of the garbage cans in hope of having park patrons carry out the refuse that they generate and dispose of it at home. Managers use this policy as a way to reduce the costs associated with hauling trash out of the park, and to deter patrons from leaving garbage in the park. Reducing the amount of trash clean up also gives the park staff the ability to focus on other operational needs and park projects. This study looks at the effectiveness of carry in/ carry out policies in federal parks, state parks, and NGO-managed lands by interviewing sixteen managers (n=16) of these areas in the Northeast. This exploratory study used grounded theory. Two strategies were used to collect data (online survey and phone interviews). Data was analyzed by coding. Results suggest that the number one barrier for getting visitors to comply with CICO policies is a lack of awareness about littering. The most common benefit for using a CICO system is to save money, followed by creating public awareness about the items brought into parks. This study found that 67% of NGO managers and 75% of federal managers think that CICO is an effective policy; state park managers were mixed on whether CICO policies are in fact effective. The one thing that federal, state, and NGO agencies agree on is that there is always litter to be picked up by staff or volunteers. The amount of that litter varied from park to park, and there does not seem to be one strategy that works for everyone.</p> State University of New York Col. of Environmental Science & Forestry 2017-06-09 00:00:00.0 thesis http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10273538 EN
collection NDLTD
language EN
sources NDLTD
topic Natural resource management|Recreation
spellingShingle Natural resource management|Recreation
Powers, Sarah A.
The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
description <p> Carry in/ Carry out (CICO) policies have been used in front-country parks for a long time. According to the National Park Service (2013), &ldquo;trash free parks&rdquo; are ones that implement carry in and carry out policies; the manager of a park removes all or most of the garbage cans in hope of having park patrons carry out the refuse that they generate and dispose of it at home. Managers use this policy as a way to reduce the costs associated with hauling trash out of the park, and to deter patrons from leaving garbage in the park. Reducing the amount of trash clean up also gives the park staff the ability to focus on other operational needs and park projects. This study looks at the effectiveness of carry in/ carry out policies in federal parks, state parks, and NGO-managed lands by interviewing sixteen managers (n=16) of these areas in the Northeast. This exploratory study used grounded theory. Two strategies were used to collect data (online survey and phone interviews). Data was analyzed by coding. Results suggest that the number one barrier for getting visitors to comply with CICO policies is a lack of awareness about littering. The most common benefit for using a CICO system is to save money, followed by creating public awareness about the items brought into parks. This study found that 67% of NGO managers and 75% of federal managers think that CICO is an effective policy; state park managers were mixed on whether CICO policies are in fact effective. The one thing that federal, state, and NGO agencies agree on is that there is always litter to be picked up by staff or volunteers. The amount of that litter varied from park to park, and there does not seem to be one strategy that works for everyone.</p>
author Powers, Sarah A.
author_facet Powers, Sarah A.
author_sort Powers, Sarah A.
title The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
title_short The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
title_full The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
title_fullStr The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
title_full_unstemmed The Effectiveness of Carry In/Carry Out Policies in Front Country Recreational Settings
title_sort effectiveness of carry in/carry out policies in front country recreational settings
publisher State University of New York Col. of Environmental Science & Forestry
publishDate 2017
url http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10273538
work_keys_str_mv AT powerssaraha theeffectivenessofcarryincarryoutpoliciesinfrontcountryrecreationalsettings
AT powerssaraha effectivenessofcarryincarryoutpoliciesinfrontcountryrecreationalsettings
_version_ 1718458242688876544