Skip to main content

Public Parks and Privilege


 

Among the responses to yesterday’s post on Camp Ilchester was this suggestion:

I’m hoping the County will provide public transit to it. Not seeing anything nearby.



This issues comes up a lot for me, doesn’t it? Public transit. If a place is inaccessible by public transit, we are essentially saying it is for those with cars only. Can a place truly be a public park if only a portion of the public can go there?

Speaking of which:



Here is a listing of all of Maryland’s State Parks. I wonder how many are served by public transit? And here’s an additional hurdle: fees. This website, Low Income Relief, gives you advice on:

How to Save Money When Visiting Maryland State Parks

Now, you can get in free if you are disabled or over sixty-two. If you are poor and don’t have a car? Well, you very likely can’t get there. And if you can, you still won’t be able to afford to get in.

I don’t want you to think that I have never before contemplated how poverty is an obstacle that comes between people and their ability to access good things. But it is the first time I’ve thought of it in connection with public parks. Don’t we establish and maintain public parks for the common good? Shouldn’t the “common good” include everyone?

Recently I bumped into a concept that's been circulating on the internet:

If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the poor.

Essentially, the rich can pay the fine, the poor go to jail.

In the case of parks, one might say:

If a park requires a personal vehicle and an entrance fee, that park exists only for the rich.

“But I’m not rich!” you say. Well, there all sorts of definitions of ‘rich’. But, to someone without a car or the discretionary income to pay an entrance fee, that chasm between the haves and the have-nots is pretty wide. It can look mighty affluent over here from where they are standing.

Why does that matter? Consider this. A recent study found that people who spent two hours a week in green spaces such as local parks or other natural environments reported improvements in health and psychological well-being.

These studies have shown that time in nature — as long as people feel safe — is an antidote for stress: It can lower blood pressure and stress hormone levels, reduce nervous system arousal, enhance immune system function, increase self-esteem, reduce anxiety, and improve mood. Attention Deficit Disorder and aggression lessen in natural environments, which also help speed the rate of healing. (“Ecopsychology: How Immersion in Nature Benefits Your Health,” Jim Robins, Yale Environment 360)

A picnic in the park, a hike in a beautiful trail, a refreshing swim with friends or family isn’t just fun, although the ability to have fun is reason enough to seek them out. Those experiences in nature are also healing and restorative in ways that can have an important impact for everyone, most especially those who are struggling with stress, pain, and worry. Like those living in poverty, for instance.

We sometimes describe things that are easily achievable as “a walk in the park.” Or, if they’re difficult or unpleasant we say, “that was no picnic.” Yet both that walk in the park and that picnic are no more than figures of speech for many if access to public parks is primarily for the privileged.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Teacher Gifts

Today is the last day of school before the Winter Break. It’s a good time to remember the far-reaching nature of our public school system. You may not have children. You may have sent your children to independent schools. It matters not. You will be impacted one way or another. Yesterday I read a long thread on Facebook about several waves of illness in the schools right now. There’s influenza A and norovirus, I believe. And of course there’s COVID. Apparently in some individual schools the rate of illness is high enough for school admin to notify parents.  When I was little the acceptable holiday gift for a teacher was one of those lovely floral handkerchief squares. (I don’t know what it was for male teachers. They were rare in my elementary years.) These days the range of teacher gifts is wider and I have fond memories of Target gift cards which I have written about before. I think it’s safe to say that giving one’s teacher Influenza, norovirus, or COVID is not the ideal holiday...
1 comment
Read more

They Can Wait

This is not a typical Saturday post. That’s because, in my community, it’s not a typical Saturday.  Oakland Mills High School, after years of deferred repair, needs massive renovation. It’s pretty simple: when you don’t fix a problem it gets bigger. The school system itself said the the OMHS school building was  "no longer conducive to learning" back in 2018.  2018 .  But Thursday the Boad of Education voted to push it out of the lineup of important projects which will be given the go-ahead to proceed soonest.  In my opinion it’s a terrible decision and sets a dangerous precedent. To explain, here’s the advocacy letter I sent in support of Oakland Mills High School. I was rather proud of it. I am writing to ask you to proceed with needed renovation at Oakland Mills High School in the most timely and comprehensive manner humanly possible. I have read the letter sent to you by the Oakland Mills Community Association and I am in complete agreement. You are extremel...
1 comment
Read more

Separate and Unequal

  Remember “Separate but equal”? Remember how that really meant that Black schools languished in  broken-down buildings without adequate heat or toilet facilities, with cast-off, ragged learning materials, underfunded and largely ignored? The Supreme Court struck that down in 1954. The evidence was clear that separate was not equal. Plessy v Ferguson had led to - - no, endorsed - - deeply unequal schooling and opportunities. We tend to think of Brown v Board as being purely about racial integration. It was not.  It was about the logical consequences of segregation. And they were not, not, not equal. The ruling in 1954 didn’t transform public education for non-whites into a land of milk and honey by any means. But it articulated some essential truths in a way that made including everyone a legal precedent which could be relied upon and built upon. It was better than what came before it but it rested upon unsteady ground. It did not necessarily change the hearts or minds ...
1 comment
Read more