The URL can be used to link to this page

10/11/2004 - Packet Parks & Recreation Advisory Board AGENDA Monday October 11 , 2004 7:00 p.m. Tigard Water Building 8777 SW Burnham Street 1 . Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes 9/13/04 3. Comments from the audience 4. Discuss Parks and Recreation Assessment Survey 5. Wildlife Refuge Discussion 6. Adjourn 00 o OOOTHE NELSON REPORT PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNSEL•P.O.BOX 12945•SALEM,OREGON 97309• (503)363-7084 CITY OF TIGARD - 2004 SURVEY RESEARCH REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SEPTEMBER 8, 2004 The following survey research report provides some valuable information regarding voter's attitudes and opinions concerning a variety of proposals to enhance recreational opportunities for Tigard residents. This report should assist the city in determining what if, any, recreational projects would be supported by residents. Below, The Nelson Report has highlighted the key results of the survey research report. The final report is over 200 pages in length,with multiple tables designed to assist the client in understanding and analyzing the respondents'views. Throughout this executive summary, The Nelson Report identifies "key" demographics for many of the questions. Key demographics are those subgroups that respond at a higher percentage rate than the total sample for any given response. The key demographic groups for any given opinion are not necessarily the only subgroups in the survey who share that opinion. They are, however, the ones that hold that opinion most strongly. A total of 383 respondents were interviewed between August 23 and August 27,2004. The margin of error for this survey is+/-4.99% at the 95% level of confidence. Prepared By The Nelson Report i FAVOR/OPPOSE: CREATING RECREATION DIVISION Respondents were read the following information and question: "The City of Tigard currently provides park services only. Park services do not include recreation programs. Many individuals and groups have come up with a variety of ideas to enhance recreational opportunities for city residents such as children's classes, day camps, summer playground programs, camps, special events, middle school programs, teen programs and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes. We are going to be presenting you several of these ideas. These ideas are not to be viewed as city proposals, but merely a way to gauge public support of the following options." "The city would like your opinion on whether recreational programs should be offered to city residents. Currently park services are paid for out of the City of Tigard budget. The city has two other options they would like your opinion on." "One option is for the city to create a separate Recreation Division with its own budget. This Division would be funded by the city's general fund revenues." "Would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the City of Tigard creating a Recreation Division of the city?" Well over half of respondents, 57%, favored creating a Recreation Division of the city, while 31% opposed. Twelve percent were not sure as displayed below. Favor/Oppose: Creating Recreation Division 60 50 a� 40 c L 30 20- 10 0 - Favor Oppose Not Sure Prepared By The Nelson Report 2 Key demographics who favored the City of Tigard creating a Recreation Division of the city were females (63%), 18-34 years old(79%), 35-44 years old(62%), renters(65%),voters in 1 out of 4 elections (66%), and 4 out of 4 elections(59%). Key groups who opposed creating a Recreation Division of the city were males (35%), 55-64 years old (38%),65+years old(33%), and voters in 2 out of 4 elections (35%). FAVOR/OPPOSE: CREATING RECREATION DISTRICT Next, respondents were read the following question: "Another option is for Tigard to present to voters for approval, a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority." "Would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority?" Slightly over half of respondents, 53%, opposed the creation of a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority,while 34% favored the proposal. Thirteen percent were not sure. The following chart shows the comparison between the proposals to create a Recreation Division and Recreation District. Prepared By The Nelson Report 3 Comparison: Recreation Division/Recreation District 60 50 57 53 40 30 � 34 - 31 i a 2(1 �n 12 13.E o Favor Oppose Not Sure p Division Distric� Key demographics who opposed the creation of a Recreation District with its own taxing authority were males(58%), 55-64 years old(66%),45-54 years old(59%), home owners (56%), and voters in 2 out of 4 elections (67%). Key groups who favored the creation of a Recreation District were 18-34 years old(41%), 35-44 years old (40%), renters (48%), voters in 3 out of 4 elections (38%), and 1 out of 4 elections (37%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 4 RECREATION DIVISION VS. RECREATION DISTRICT Respondents were given the following information and question: "The creation of a Recreation Division within the city would cost $860,000 per year. The operation of the Recreation Division would be paid for through an operating levy and would increase the property tax rate by 22-cents per thousand. The other option is for Tigard residents to vote for the creation of a Recreation District. A Recreation District would cost$1 million per year and increase the property tax rate by 26-cents per thousand." "If you had to choose, would you prefer the creation of a CITY RECREATION DIVISION at a cost of 22-cents per thousand, or the creation of a SPECIAL RECREATION DISTRICT at a cost of 26-cents per thousand?" Slightly less than half of respondents, 48%,preferred the creation of a city Recreation Division,while 28%preferred neither option. Thirteen percent preferred a special Recreation District, one percent cited"other"options, and ten percent were not sure. RecreationDivision vs. Recreation District 48 yV - ❑Recreation Di�ii, t 30 p!Ze:rt io, DtE $t� 4 28 2i! ct f ❑tither [3 Not sure 10 13 10 1 lo ,1 Prepared By The Nelson Report 5 Key demographics who preferred a city Recreation Division were females(51%), 18-34 years old (79%), 35-44 years old (52%),45-54 years old (51%),renters(50%),voters in 3 out of 4 elections(58%), and 2 out of 4 elections (55%). Primary reasons for preferring a city Recreation Division were: Costs less than Recreation District 71% Good idea/makes sense 7% City is more aware of community needs 7% Key groups who preferred neither option were males(32%), 65+years old (33%), 55-64 years old(31%),and voters in 2 out of 4 elections (32%). Key demographics who preferred a special Recreation District were males (16%), 55-64 years old(18%), and voters in 4 out of 4 elections (16%). Main reasons for preferring a Special Recreation District were: Prefer independent district without city control 37% My preference 16% Includes more than just city residents 16% "Other"responses are listed in the table below. The reader should note the following percentages were taken from a much, much smaller sub-sample (1% of all respondents). Of Total Universe Merge with Tualatin Hills District 34% less than 1% Both 33% less than 1% Construct Senior Center 33% less than 1% Prepared By The Nelson Report 6 Following the creation of a Recreation Division vs. Recreation District question, respondents were asked the following question. The net gain/loss reflects the push or movement in support of a Recreation District. Recreation Recreation Not Net Question Division District Neither Other Sure Gain/Loss Division vs. District 48 13 28 1 10 If you knew the Special Recreation District would be similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District,would you prefer the creation of a CITY RECREATION DIVISION at a cost of 22-cents per thousand, or the creation of a SPECIAL RECREATION DISTRICT at a cost of 26-cents per thousand? 36 23 26 1 14 +10 Key observations to this argument are as follows: Information that the Special Recreation District would be similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District pushed+10% of respondents to support a Recreation District. Key demographics who increased in support for a Recreation District were 35- 44 years old(+20%), and 18-34 years old(+12%). Again, "other"responses are listed in the table below. The reader should note the following percentages were taken from a much,much smaller sub-sample (1%of all respondents). Of Total Universe No new taxes 50% less than 1% Merge with Tualatin Hills District 25% less than 1% Open to idea 25% less than 1% Prepared By The Nelson Report WHO'S AHEAD: $6.75 MILLION COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER In addition, respondents were given the following information and question: "Another concept is a 20-year $6.75 million bond measure that would be used to construct a 30,000 square foot Community Recreation Center. The Community Recreation Center would include an indoor gym,classrooms, multi-purpose rooms, and meeting rooms. The construction of a Community Recreation Center would increase the property tax rate by 13-cents per thousand of assessed value." "If an election were held today,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $6.75 million bond measure for a Community Recreation Center for the City of Tigard that would increase the property tax rate by 13-cents per thousand?" Slightly over half of respondents, 52%, opposed a$6.75 million Community Recreation Center,while 41% favored the proposal. Seven percent were not sure. Who's Ahead: $6.75 Mion Bond Measure 60 50 r as 40 v as 30 a 20 10 0 Fawr ©ppase Not Sure Key demographics who opposed a$6.75 million Community Recreation Center were males (54%), 55-64 years old (63%), 65+ years old(58%), and voters in 3 out of 4 elections (54%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 8 Foremost reasons for opposing a Community Recreation Center were: Taxes too high/oppose increase 43% Already have activities/facilities/school gyms 26% Focus on more important priorities 10% Key groups who favored a$6.75 million Community Recreation Center were 18-34 years old(68%), 35-44 years old(46%), 45-54 years old(43%), renters(50%), voters in 2 out of 4 elections (47%), and 1 out of 4 elections (45%). Top reasons for favoring the Recreation Center were: Need recreational facilities 54% Would improve quality of life 26% The chart below displays the $6.75 million Community Recreation Center who's ahead results with the corresponding key demographics. Who's Ahead Key Demographics: Community Recreation Center 18-34 Years27 3544 Years 0 45-54 Years 41 w Renters4A 9 1 Of 4 Flections 2 Of 4 flections Males C> - a 55-64 Years52 65+Years 52 6 3 Of 4 flections 52 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percentages E3 Who's Ahead p Key Demographics Prepared By The Nelson Report 9 Furthermore, respondents were asked: "In addition, the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center would cost $400,000 per year. This concept would increase the property tax rate by an additional 11-cents per thousand." "If an election were held today,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept that would increase property tax rate by 11-cents per thousand?" Well over half of respondents, 55%, opposed a proposal to fund the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center, while 34% favored the proposal. Eleven percent were not sure. Who's Ahead: Operation & Maintenance Of Community Recreation Center 60- 50 d Y 40 v 30 w 20 10 Fawr Oppose Not Sure Key groups who opposed the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center were males (57%), 55-64 years old(61%), 65+years old(60%), 45-54 years old (57%), and voters in 3 out of 4 elections (62%). Primary reasons for opposing Recreation Center funding were: Taxes too high/oppose increase 54% Unnecessary/use schools/other buildings 20% Not a high priority with city's current budget 11% Prepared By The Nelson Report 10 Key demographics who favored funding the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center were females (36%), 18-34 years old(59%), 35-44 years old (45%), 45-54 years old(36%),voters in 2 out of 4 elections (41%), and 1 out of 4 elections (39%). Principle reasons favoring Recreation Center funding were: Unable to operate without money 44% Needed/good idea 36% The chart below displays the Community Recreation Center funding who's ahead results with the corresponding key demographics. Who's Ahead Key Demographics: Funding Community Recreation Center Females 18-34 Years 75 0 3544 Years w 45-54 Years 1 Of 4 Flections 2 Of 4 flections34 --------Males 21-- c. 45-54 Years UP 55-64 Years 65+Years 3 Of 4 Elections 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percentages M Who's Ahead El Key Demographics Prepared By The Nelson Report 11 PUSH RESULTS: COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER Next,respondents were asked a series of questions designed to gauge the positive or negative impact of certain pieces of information. This methodology was used to ascertain which arguments produced the greatest net movement from the original "who's ahead" question. The reader should keep in mind the "if you knew. . ." format. Certain arguments may push people "if they knew,"but the nature of the argument may make it impossible to convince someone that it is factual. In addition,the resources required to do the convincing may be too great when compared to other arguments. This series was crosschecked later in the survey by the Iagree/disagree series. The results are ranked on the following page in descending positive order. The net gain/loss reflects the push or movement off the original "who's ahead" question. Not Net Question Favor Oppose Sure Gain/Loss Who's Ahead Results: Community Recreation Center 41 52 7 If you knew the Community Recreation Center would enable the city to provide additional recreational opportunities for Tigard residents, such as live theatre performances, children's programs like classes, summer playground programs, camps, special events, middle school programs, teen programs, and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a bond measure? 52 38 10 +11 Prepared By The Nelson Report 12 Not Net Question Favor Oppose Sure Gain/Loss Who's Ahead Results: Community Recreation Center 41 52 7 If you knew the bond payments would be structured so that new residents who move into the community in the future would assist in the payment of the bond measure,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the $6.75 million concept? 49 40 11 +8 If you knew that a bond measure would cost property taxpayers 13-cents per thousand or $26 per year for an owner of a$200,000 home,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the bond measure? 48 43 9 +7 If you knew operation and maintenance costs for the Community Recreation Center would increase property taxes by an additional 11-cents per thousand or$22 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the bond measure? 42 47 11 +1 Key observations to this series were as follows: • The argument that produced the largest increase (+11%) in support of a Community Recreation Center was knowledge that the Community Recreation Center would enable the city to provide additional recreational opportunities for Tigard residents, such as live theatre performances, children's programs like classes, summer playground programs, camps, special events,middle school programs,teen programs, and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes. Key demographics who increased in support were females (+16%),35-44 years old(+22%),45-54 years old(+16%), home owners (+13%), voters in 1 out of 4 elections (+16%), and 4 out of 4 elections(+13%). • Information that bond payments would be structured so that new residents who move into the community in the future would assist in the payment of the bond measure increased support for the Recreation Center by+8%. Key demographics impacted with this information were 35-44 years old(+16), 45-54 years old(+10%), home owners (+10%), and voters in 4 out of 4 elections (+10%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 13 The fact that the bond measure would cost property taxpayers 13-cents per thousand or $26 per year for an owner of a$200,000 home also moved (+7%) of respondents to support the proposed Community Recreation Center. Key demographics moved with this information were females (+12%), 35-44 years old (+19%),45-54 years old(+9%), and voters in 3 out of 4 elections (+10%). WHO'S AHEAD: $400,000 SKATE PARK Next, respondents were presented with the following information and question: "Another idea is a 10-year,$400,000 bond measure that would be used to construct a skate park for youth. This concept would cost property taxpayers approximately 1-cent per thousand or$2.60 per year for the owner of a $200,000 home." "If an election were held today,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $400,000 bond measure to construct a skate park that would increase property tax rate by 1-cent perthousand?" Slightly less than half of respondents,49%, opposed a bond measure to construct a skate park, while 43% favored the proposal. Eight percent were not sure. Who's Ahead: $400,000 Spate Park 9'' 40 43 71 r 30 20 r 10�/ 0 F,]Nor Oppose Not Sure Prepared By The Nelson Report 14 Key demographics who opposed the proposed skate park were males (51%), 65+years old(54%), 55-64 years old(52%), and voters in 3 out of 4 elections(51%). Foremost reasons respondents opposed the proposed skate park were: No more taxes 26% Unnecessary 17% Will be only utilized by a few 11% Key groups who favored a$400,000 skate park were males (46%), 18-34 years old(50%), 35-44 years old(49%), 45-54 years old (48%), and voters in 1 out of 4 elections (47%). Main reasons respondents favored constructing a skate park were: Need activities for youth 70% Reasonable cost 16% The chart below displays the skate park who's ahead results with the corresponding key demographics. Who's Micad Ke% Demographics: Shate Park- Males arkMales � 43 3 18-34 fears 3544 bears 45_54 %ears 1 1 Of 4 Hections i i �lalcti 49 2 1 55-641'ears 49 65-1 N ears 49 5 e ( 3 Of 4 flections 49 (1 11? 20 311 40 1;O 6(1 Percentages Who's Ahead p Key Demographics Prepared By The Nelson Report 15 WHO'S AHEAD: $5 MILLION BOND MEASURE FOR PARKS/ATHLETIC FIELDS Next, respondents were given information and question: "Another idea includes a$5 million bond measure that would be used to purchase land to construct additional parks and athletic fields throughout the city. This idea would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand." "If an election were held today,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $5 million bond measure to construct additional parks and athletic fields that would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand?" Respondents were split with 45%who opposed a$5 million bond measure for parks and athletic fields and 44%who favored the proposal. Eleven percent were not sure. Who's Ahead: $5 Million For Parks/ Athletic Fields 50 ,t4S. 40 oro A 30 L aW 20- M 17, y haN°or Oppose Not Stire Key demographics who opposed the proposed bond measure for parks and athletic fields were females (47%), 65+years old(50%), 55-64 years old(49%), renters (50%), voters in 2 out of 4 elections(50%), and 3 out of 4 elections (47%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 16 Primary reasons respondents opposed the proposed parks/athletic fields were: Already have parks/don't maintain what they have 38% Taxes too high/oppose increase 34% Key groups who favored a additional parks/athletic fields were males (47%), 35-44 years old(57%), 18-34 and 45-54 years old(47%), and voters in 1 out of 4 elections (58%). Main reasons respondents favored additional parks/athletic fields were: Need more parks/athletic fields 41% Favor city improvements 17% Provides place for children to play 11% The chart below displays the proposed parks and athletic fields who's ahead results with the corresponding key demographics. Who's Ahead Key Demographics: Parks/Athletic Fields Malc% L 18-34 Nears fi -- 35-44 fear's - 44 45-54 Sears 44 1 Of 4 Elections 1' 4 Females 7-5 o 55-64 Years 45 o. ' � 65+1ear4 45 O Renters 2 Of 4 Elections 45 - Mm _ i 3 Of 4 Elections 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percentages 0 Who's Ahead ❑Key Demographics Prepared By The Nelson Report 17 Following the $5 million bond measure for parks and athletic fields question,respondents were asked the following question. The net gain/loss reflects the push or movement in favor of the proposal. Not Net Question Favor Oppose Sure Gain/Loss Who's Ahead Results: Additional Parks/Athletic Fields 44 45 11 If you knew the $5 million bond measure would increase property taxes by 9-cents per thousand or $18 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept to construct additional parks and athletic fields? 44 43 13 +0 WHO'S AHEAD: $5 MILLION BOND MEASURE FOR WETLANDS/GREEN SPACES Next,respondents were asked: "In addition, there is another idea which includes a$5 million bond measure that would be used to purchase land in order to protect wetlands and green spaces throughout the city. This idea would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand." "If an election were held today,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $5 million bond measure to purchase land for wetlands and green spaces that would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand?" Slightly less than half of respondents 49%, favored the proposed $5 million bond measure for wetlands and green spaces,while 41%opposed the proposal. Ten percent were not sure. Prepared By The Nelson Report 18 Who's Ahead: $5 M111on For Wetlands/ Green Spaces 50 40 on a 30 ti a 20IX 10 avor Oppose Not Sure Key groups who favored purchasing land for wetlands and green spaces were females (54%), 18-34 years old(76%),45-54 years old(61%), renters (60%), and voters in 2 out of 4 elections (52%). Main reasons respondents favored land for wetlands/green spaces were: Need to preserve open spaces 67% Good for the environment 17% Key demographics who opposed the proposed bond measure for wetlands and green spaces were males (46%), 55-64 years old(48%), 65+years old(47%), 35-44 years old(46%), home owners(43%), and voters in 1 out of 4 elections(45%). Primary reasons respondents opposed wetlands and green spaces were: Oppose tax increase 33% Unnecessary 26% Environment is already protected 13% The following chart displays the proposed bond measure for wetlands and green spaces who's ahead results with the corresponding key demographics. Prepared By The Nelson Report 19 Who's ,Ahead Key Demographics: Wetlands/Green Spaces ------- Females 5 0 1 149 18-34 Years 45-54 Years _ Renters 49 2 Of 4 flections 42 Mates 41 3544 Years 55- 4 Years 41 � c - c. . 65+fears Home Owners 41 1 Of 4 Flections ________..-___ _ 0 10 20 30 40 `41 60 741 100 Percentages p Who's Ahead p Key Demographics Following the $5 million bond measure for wetlands and green.spaces question, respondents were asked the following question. The net gain/loss reflects the push or movement in favor of the proposal. Not Net Question Favor Oppose Sure Gain/Loss Who's Ahead Results: Wetlands/Green Space 49 41 10 If you knew the $5 million bond measure would increase property taxes by 9-cents per thousand or $18 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home,would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept to protect wetlands and green spaces throughout the city? 49 38 13 +0 Prepared By The Nelson Report 20 CONCEPTS PREFERRED IN ONE BOND MEASURE Next respondents were given the following options: "Thinking about four of the concepts—CONSTRUCTION OF A RECREATION CENTER, CONSTRUCTION OF A SKATE PARK, the PURCHASE OF LAND FOR PARKS AND ATHLETIC FIELDS, and the PURCHASE OF LAND FOR WETLANDS AND GREEN SPACES,which of these concepts would you be willing to vote for in one bond measure?" A plurality of respondents, 24%, were willing to vote for a Recreation Center only in one bond measure,while 21%would vote for wetlands and green spaces only. Sixteen percent were not willing to vote for any of the concepts, another 16% were willing to vote for"other" concepts, and 13%would vote for land for parks and athletic fields only. Eight percent would vote for a skate park only and two percent were not sure. Concepts Preferred In One Bond Measure 25 - u 24 M 1 Y, 20 � w _— -- — ❑Rcc c.11 ton Center lj 16 16 ❑k�eiimick Green Spaces ❑None 13 ❑Other 10 �c ❑Parks/athletic Fields 8 ❑Skate Park ❑Not S Lre O 2 fP . Key demographics who would vote for a Recreation Center only were females (26%), 18- 34 years old (41%), 35-44 years old(28%), and voters in 4 out of 4 elections (26%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 21 Key demographics who would only vote for land for wetlands and green spaces were females(25%), 18-34 and 55-64 years old(24%), 45-54 years old(23%), renters (23%), voters in 3 out of 4 elections (29%), and 2 out of 4 elections (26%). Key groups who would not vote for any of the concepts were males (18%), 65+years old (22%), 55-64 years old(21%), and voters in 4 out of 4 elections (19%). Key demographics who cited "other" concept combinations were 35-44 and 45-54 years old(25%), 18-34 years old(21%),renters(19%), voters in 1 out of 4 elections(24%), and 2 out of 4 elections (20%). Of those respondents who felt"other"options were best, "all of them"topped the list, followed by "parks and open space", as indicated in the table below(16% of all respondents). Of Total Universe All of them 20% 3% Parks and open space 17% 3% All except skate park 8% 1% Recreation Center and open space 8% 1% Recreation Center and skate park 7% 1% Skate park and open space 7% 1% Recreation Center and parks 7% 1% In a special cross tab,44%of respondents who previously said they favored a Community Recreation Center(18% of all respondents) said they would only vote for a Community Recreation Center in one bond measure. In another key cross tab, 36% of respondents who previously said they favored land for wetlands and green spaces(18%of all respondents) said they would only vote for wetlands t.} and green spaces in one bond measure. A Prepared By The Nelson Report 22 Y HOW MUCH RESIDENTS ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR x RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES A plurality of respondents, 23%, were not willing to pay anything per year to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces in the City of Tigard,while 21%were z willing to pay between $1-$18 per year. Seventeen percent were willing to pay between $19-$36 per year,ten percent between $37-$52 per year, and eight percent were willing to pay over $90. x Five percent were willing to pay between $53-$90 per year and 16%were not sure. Amount Residents Are Willing To Pay For Recreation 25 k y 20 21 3 5 17 16 y a 10 t0 d - 8 --- a"i 5 G a __ - O Nothing 0S1-S18 ❑S19-S36 ❑S37-S52 ❑S53-S90 p Cher$90 ❑Not Sure z Key groups who were not willing to pay anything to enhance recreational opportunities in Tigard were males (27%), 55-64 years old(31%), 65+years old(30%), renters (25%),voters in 2 out of 4 elections (26%), and 3 out of 4 elections (25%). Key demographics who were willing to pay between $1-$18 per year in to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces were 65+ years old (25%), 18-34 years old (24%), and voters in 2 out of 4 elections (26%). Prepared By The Nelson Report 23 Key demographics who were willing to pay between $19-$36 per year were females (20%), 35-44 years old(28%), 18-34 years old(24%), and voters in 1 out of 4 elections (24%). In an interesting cross tab,25% of respondents who previously said they favored land for wetlands and green spaces (12% of all respondents) said they would be willing to pay between $1418 per year to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces. In another cross tab,20%of respondents who also previously said they favored land for wetlands and green spaces(10%of all respondents) said they would be willing to pay between $19-$36 per year to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces. In yet another cross tab, 25%of respondents who also previously said they favored a Community Recreation Center(10%of all respondents) said they would be willing to pay between$19-$36 per year to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces. AGREE/DISAGREE In this series,respondents were presented with a number of potentially prejudicial statements regarding the various recreation projects. This format was designed to serve as a cross-check on various close-ended questions as well as to pick up variations on prejudices not readily apparent in those types of questions. The following table displays all of the agree/disagree statements in descending order of agreement. AGREE/DISAGREE STATEMENTS IN DESCENDING ORDER OF AGREEMENT y Statement Agree Disagree Not Sure I like the idea that the city is considering the protection of natural wetlands and greenways in the city. I favor the idea that would preserve our natural resources. 69 25 6 Prepared By The Nelson Report 24 Statement Agree Disagree Not Sure It's about time the City of Tigard began providing additional recreational opportunities for citizens. I favor the concept of a Community Recreation Center. 49 43 8 Our city already has plenty of parks and athletic fields. I oppose the $5 million bond measure for parks and fields. 42 46 12 I would prefer to create a Recreation District similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District to enhance recreational opportunities for residents rather than create a Recreation Division within the city. 38 34 28 My taxes are already too high. I can't afford any of the recreation concepts being discussed in this survey. 38 56 6 I like the community just the way it is. We don't need additional recreational activities to improve livability in our area. 30 60 10 Prepared By The Nelson Report 25 CONCLUSIONS 1. Well over half of respondents favor creating a Recreation Division of the city. 2. Slightly over half of respondents oppose the creation of a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority. 3. Slightly less than half of respondents prefer the creation of a city Recreation Division over a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority. 4. Primary reasons for preferring a city Recreation Division are"costs less than Recreation District", "good idea/makes sense", and"city is more aware of community needs". 5. Main reasons for preferring a Special Recreation District are "prefer independent district without city control", "my preference", and"includes more than just city residents". 6. Information that a Special Recreation District would be similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District,pushes respondents to support a Special Recreation District by a large margin. 7. Slightly over half of respondents oppose a$6.75 million Community Recreation Center, while fewer numbers favor the proposal. 8. Foremost reasons for opposing a Community Recreation Center are "taxes too high/oppose increase", "already have activities/facilities/school gyms", and"focus on more important priorities". 9. Top reasons for favoring a Community Recreation Center are "need recreational facilities"and `would improve quality of life". 10. Well over half of respondents oppose the additional $400,000 per year it would cost to fund the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center,while slightly over one-third favor the additional costs. 11. Primary reasons for opposing funding for the operation and maintenance of the Recreation Center are "taxes too high/oppose increase", "unnecessary/use schools/other buildings", and"not a high priority with city's current budget". 12. "Unable to operate without money"tops the list of reasons for favoring the operation and maintenance costs of the Community Recreation Center, followed by"needed/good idea". Prepared By The Nelson Report 26 13. The argument that produces the largest increase in support of a Community Recreation Center is knowledge that the Community Recreation Center would enable the city to provide additional recreational opportunities for Tigard residents, such as live theatre performances, children's programs like classes, summer playground programs, camps, special events,middle school programs, teen programs, and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes. Recreation Center will enhance recreational opportunities for all Tigard residents is a primary theme for respondents. 14. Information that bond payments would be structured so that new residents who move into the community in the future would assist in the payment of the bond measure also increases support for a Recreation Center. This is a primary theme. 15. The fact that the bond measure would cost property taxpayers 13-cents per thousand or $26 per year for an owner of a$200,000 home also moves respondents to support the proposed Community Recreation Center. 16. Slightly less than half of respondents oppose a bond measure to construct a skate park, while slightly fewer numbers favor the proposal. 17. Top reasons for opposing the proposed skate park are"no more taxes", "unnecessary", and"will only be utilized by a few". 18. Main reasons for favoring a skate park are "need activities for youth"and"reasonable cost". 19. Respondents are split with slightly less than half who oppose a$5 million bond measure for parks and athletic fields and slightly less than half of favor the proposal. 20. Primary reasons for opposing the bond measure for parks and athletic fields are"already have parks/don't maintain what they have"and"taxes too high/oppose increase". 21. "Need more parks/athletic fields"tops the list of reasons for favoring the bond measure to purchase land for parks and athletic fields, followed by"favor city improvements", and "provides place for children to play". 22. Slightly less than half of respondents favor a$5 million bond measure for wetlands and green spaces. 23. Foremost reasons for favoring land for wetlands and green spaces are "need to preserve open spaces"and"good for the environment". 24. Top reasons respondents oppose land for wetlands and green spaces are "oppose tax increase", "unnecessary", and"environment is already protected". Prepared By The Nelson Report 27 25. A plurality of respondents are willing to vote for a Recreation Center only in one bond measure,while slightly fewer numbers are willing to vote for wetlands and green spaces only. 26. A plurality of respondents are not willing to pay anything per year to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces in Tigard,while slightly fewer numbers are willing to pay between$1-$18. 27. Tigard residents clearly prefer the creation of a city Recreation Division over a special Recreation District even after being presented with information that the Recreation District would be similar to Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District. While none of the proposed bond measures receive a majority of support, it appears Tigard residents are most supportive of a bond measure that would be used to preserve wetlands and green spaces, followed by a proposal for additional parks and athletic fields. While slightly more than half of respondents oppose a bond measure for a Community Recreation Center, information that the Recreation Center would enhance recreational opportunities for all residents significantly increases support for the proposal. It is clear, however, respondents are not supportive of the additional operation and maintenance costs associated with a Recreation Center. Even with some of these positive responses, respondents appear to be struggling with the tax increases that come with each of these proposals. Prepared By The Nelson Report 28 i FINAL RESULTS QUESTIONNAIRE 'l FINAL RESULTS (n=383) CITY OF TIGARD 2004 FINAL DRAFT Hello, my name is I'm with The Nelson Report, a public opinion research firm. We are conducting a brief survey today in your area and would like to include your household's opinions. May I please take a few minutes of your time? Let me assure you I am not selling anything. First of all, are you registered to vote in the state of Oregon? (INTERVIEWER: IF NO, POLITELY TERMINATE) The City of Tigard currently provides park services only. Park services do not include recreation programs. Many individuals and groups have come up with a variety of ideas to enhance recreational opportunities for city residents such as children's classes, day camps, summer playground programs, camps, special events,middle school programs, teen programs and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes. We are going to be presenting you several of these ideas. These ideas are not to be viewed as city proposals,but merely a way to gauge public support of the following options. The city would like your opinion on whether recreational programs should be offered to city residents. Currently park services are paid for out of the City of Tigard budget. The city has two other options they would like your opinion on. One option is for the city to create a separate Recreation Division with its own budget. This Division would be funded by the city's general fund revenues. 1. Would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the City of Tigard creating a Recreation Division of the city? 1. Favor 57 2. Oppose 31 3. Not Sure/Refused 12 Another option is for Tigard to present to voters for approval, a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority. 2. Would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a separate Recreation District with its own taxing authority? 1. Favor 34 2. Oppose 53 3. Not Sure/Refused 13 Page 1 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report i The creation of a Recreation Division within the city would cost $860 thousand per year. The operation of the Recreation Division would be paid for through an operating levy and would increase the property tax rate by 22-cents per thousand. The other option is for Tigard residents to vote for the creation of a Recreation District. A Recreation District would cost $1 million per year and increase the property tax rate by 26-cents per thousand. 3. If you had to choose, would you prefer the creation of a CITY RECREATION DIVISION at a cost of 22-cents per thousand, or the creation of a SPECIAL RECREATION DISTRICT at a cost of 26-cents per thousand? 1. City Recreation Division (GO TO "A") 48 2. Special Recreation District (GO TO"A") 13 3. Neither(SKIP TO #4) 28 _-' 4. Other 1 5. Not Sure/Refused (SKIP TO #4) 10 A. (RECREATION DIVISION/RECREATION DISTRICT ONLY FROM #3) Why would you prefer the (RECREATION DIVISION) (RECREATION DISTRICT)? (PROBE) 4. If you knew the Special Recreation District would be similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, would you prefer the creation of a CITY RECREATION DIVISION at a cost of 22-cents per thousand, or the creation of a SPECIAL RECREATION DISTRICT at a cost of 26-cents per thousand? 1. City Recreation Division 36 2. Special Recreation District 23 3. Neither 26 4. Other 1 5. Not Sure/Refused 14 Another concept is a 20-year$6.75 million bond measure that would be used to construct a 30,000 square foot Community Recreation Center. The Community Recreation Center would include an indoor gym, classrooms, multi-purpose rooms, and meeting rooms. The construction of a Community Recreation Center would increase the property tax rate by 13-cents per thousand of assessed value. 5. If an election were held today, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $6.75 million bond measure for a Community Recreation Center for the City of Tigard that would increase the property tax rate by 13-cents per thousand? 1. Favor(GO TO "B") 41 2. Oppose (GO TO"B") 52 3. Not Sure/Refused 7 B. Why would you (FAVOR) (OPPOSE) the $6.75 million bond measure? Page 2 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report In addition, the operation and maintenance of the Community Recreation Center would cost $400,000 per year. This concept would increase the property tax rate by an additional 11- cents per thousand. 6. If an election were held today, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept that would increase property tax rate by 11-cents per thousand? 1. Favor(GO TO "C") 34 2. Oppose (GO TO "C") 55 3. Not Sure/Refused 11 C. Why would you (FAVOR) (OPPOSE) the concept? (PROBE) Another idea is a 10-year, $400,000 bond measure that would be used to construct a skate park for youth. This concept would cost property taxpayers approximately 1-cent per thousand or$2.60 per year for the owner of a $200,000 home. 7. If an election were held today, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $400,000 bond measure to construct a skate park that would increase property tax rate by 1-cent per thousand? 1. Favor(GO TO "D") 43 2. Oppose (GO TO "D") 49 3. Not Sure/Refused 8 D. Why would you (FAVOR) (OPPOSE) the proposed skate park? (PROBE) Now I am going to ask you a variety of questions concerning the idea of a $6.75 million bond measure to construct a Community Recreation Center. For each one, I will give you some information and ask, whether with that information, you would FAVOR or OPPOSE the idea. 8. If you knew the bond payments would be structured so that new residents who move into the community in the future would assist in the payment of the bond measure, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the $6.75 million concept? 1. Favor 49 2. Oppose 40 3. Not Sure/Refused 11 Page 3 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report 9. If you knew the Community Recreation Center would enable the city to provide additional recreational opportunities for Tigard residents, such as live theatre performances, children's programs like classes, summer playground programs, camps, special events, middle school programs, teen programs, and adult programs such as sports leagues and classes, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a bond measure? 1. Favor 52 2. Oppose 38 3. Not Sure/Refused 10 10. If you knew that a bond measure would cost property taxpayers 13-cents per thousand or $26 per year for an owner of a$200,000 home, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the bond measure? 1. Favor 48 2. Oppose 43 3. Not Sure/Refused 9 11. If you knew operation and maintenance costs for the Community Recreation Center would increase property taxes by an additional I 1-cents per thousand or$22 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the bond measure? 1. Favor 42 2. Oppose 47 3. Not Sure/Refused 11 Another idea includes a $5 million bond measure that would be used to purchase land to construct additional parks and athletic fields throughout the city. This idea would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand. 12. If an election were held today, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $5 million bond measure to construct additional parks and athletic fields that would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand? 1. Favor(GO TO "E") 44 2. Oppose (GO TO "E") 45 3. Not Sure/Refused 11 E. Why would you (FAVOR) (OPPOSE) a$5 million bond measure for parks and athletic fields? (PROBE) Page 4 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report 13. If you knew the $5 million bond measure would increase property taxes by 9-cents per thousand or$18 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept to construct additional parks and athletic fields? 1. Favor 44 2. Oppose 43 3. Not Sure/Refused 13 In addition, there is another idea which includes a$5 million bond measure that would be used to purchase land in order to protect wetlands and green spaces throughout the city. This idea would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand. 14. If an election were held today, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE a $5 million bond measure to purchase land for wetlands and green spaces that would increase the property tax rate by 9-cents per thousand? 1. Favor(GO TO "F") 49 2. Oppose (GO TO "F") 41 3. Not Sure/Refused 10 F. Why would you (FAVOR) (OPPOSE) a $5 million bond measure for wetlands and green spaces? (PROBE) 15. If you knew the $5 million bond measure would increase property taxes by 9-cents per thousand or$18 per year for an owner of a $200,000 home, would you FAVOR or OPPOSE the concept to protect wetlands and green spaces throughout the city? 1. Favor 49 2. Oppose 38 3. Not Sure/Refused 13 16. Thinking about four of the concepts — CONSTRUCTION OF A RECREATION CENTER, CONSTRUCTION OF A SKATE PARK, the PURCHASE OF LAND FOR PARKS AND ATHLETIC FIELDS, and the PURCHASE OF LAND FOR WETLANDS AND GREEN SPACES, which of these concepts would you be willing to vote for in one bond measure? (INTERVIEWER: COMBINATION RESPONSES WILL GO UNDER THE "OTHER" CATEGORY) 1. Recreation Center Only 24 2. Skate Park Only 8 3. Land For Parks Only 13 4. Land For Wetlands/Open Spaces Only 21 5. None 16 6. Other 16 7. Not Sure/Refused 2 Page 5 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report 17. How much more would you be willing to pay each year in property taxes in order to enhance recreational opportunities and preserve green spaces throughout the City Of Tigard? 1. Nothing 23 2. $1-$18 21 3. $19-$36 17 4. $37-$52 10 5. $53-$90 5 6. Over$90 8 7. Not Sure/Refused 16 Now I am going to read you several statements some people have made concerning the various recreation projects the City of Tigard is currently seeking your opinion on. For each statement, I would like you to tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with the statement. 1. Agree 2. Disagree 4. Not Sure/Refused AGREE —DISAGREE —NOT SURE/REFUSED 18. My taxes are already too high. I can't afford any of the recreation concepts being discussed in this survey. 38-56-6 19. I like the idea that the city is considering the protection of natural wetlands and greenways in the city. I favor the idea that would preserve our natural resources. 69-25-6 20. It's about time the City of Tigard began providing additional recreational opportunities for citizens. I favor the concept of a Community Recreation Center. 49-43-8 21. Our city already has plenty of parks and athletic fields. I oppose the $5 million bond measure for parks and fields. 42-46-12 22. I like the community just the way it is. We don't need additional recreational activities to improve livability in our area. 30-60-10 Page 6 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report AGREE —DISAGREE —NOT SURE/REFUSED 23. I would prefer to create a Recreation District similar to Beaverton's Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District to enhance recreational opportunities for residents rather than create a Recreation Division within the city. 38-34-28 DEMOGRAPHICS 24. SEX: 1. Male 2. Female 25. AGE: Are you between the ages of.....? 1. 18-34 2. 35-44 3. 45-54 4. 55-64 5. 65+ 6. Not Sure/Refused 26. OWN/RENT: Do you own or rent your home? 1. Own 2. Rent 3. Not Sure/Refused INTERVIEWER: POLITELY END SURVEY WITH RESPONDENT, THEN COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: 27. VOTER HISTORY: (INTERVIEWER: RECORD THE NUMBER OF TIMES RESPONDENT HAS VOTED IN THE LAST FOUR ELECTIONS FROM THE PHONE LIST—SEE INSTRUCTION SHEET) 1. 1 Out Of 4 Elections 2. 2 Out Of 4 Elections 3. 3 Out Of 4 Elections 4. 4 Out Of 4 Elections Page 7 August 27, 2004 Prepared By The Nelson Report PS 10Nq� Al it � Friends of the Refuge g m P.O. Box 1306 F m Sherwood,OR 97140 Tlaas 7 'On the Wing S Of Chan e... Ne islet r of the Friends©#Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge g - Join us as we celebrate the future of the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge }t1 the Wings of Change Groundbreaking Ceremony Will Mark Beginning for Public Use Facilities ...The Vision Takes Flight g By Joan Patterson Saturday, May 15, 2004 It's happening,it's happening,it is Spring 2004 finally happening!On May 15,2004, More details inside and at G www.friendsoftualatinrefuge.org Mission of FOR during the ninth annual Songbird " 9 9 Printing and distribution of �� Festival,Friends of the Refuge,U.S. this newsletter made PGE Friends of the Refuge is a community- possible by a grant from `/ based volunteer organization supporting Fish and Wildlife Service,and other v Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge. partners will break ground for the ` We are dedicated to protection and outdoor ublic use actiesdew of Mt. Hood from the future Refuge fili ! More p Printed on recycled paper � Rogers Road. restoration of the Refuge for the benefit event details inside)These facilities will Wa�•side on Rol'Ro g of fish and wildlife, and for public the Refuge.Parking will be education and recreation. Join us for the Create a perfect opportunity to provide Highway Discretionary funds,along available at Home Depot with a top-notch wildlife recreation and with funds from the Refuge,City of The Board Celebration! shuttle bus running continuously to environmental education opportunities. Sherwood and Friends of the Refuge. the Refuge. Those needing special Jim Lester g g P Arlan Madsen Construction will begin this summer Additional funding is needed for the Songbird Festival&Groundbreaking assistance will be accommodated Norman Penner with the goal of opening the Refuge to environmental education shelter and (please contact the Refuge at 503- .loan Patterson theublicb mid-2005! by Kathy Suitor 590-5811). Rick Ross P y the fishing platform/overlook.U.S. On Saturday,May 15,2004,the Scott Schroeder The visitor use facilities will be Fish and Wildlife Service has ranked Activities will include guided habitat Bob Swanson constructed on the Steinborn unit of our Refuge number one in the nation Friends of Tualatin River National �`, for a wildlife/education center. tours,guided bird walks,canoe trips for Uyemura Wildlife Refuge and U.S.Fish and ti y " the refuge,just north of Sherwood. on the river,hands-on educational "` non-voting: Virginia Parks Unfortunately,the President's 2005 Wildlife Service,in partnership with Birdhouse making is ahva}ys a popular Beginning this sun-uner,the existing budget includes no funding for activities and exhibits for the kids,a g P P Metro and the Tualatin Riverkeepers, face painter, a native activity at the festival. - access from Highway 99W will be will celebrate the ninth annual Tualatin Upcoming FOR Events' construction here,and,due to a plant sale,and livemodified,leading to a gravel road and River Songbird Festival on the Refuge. music by local group iat a Glance parking area.Visitors will stroll along a number of factors,the Service's five- This year, we will also mark a it year construction budget also falls Trashcan Joe, Bird of �� met a� ad universally accessible year-round trail milestone in the development of the may TRKBIue HeronAvuatrfsUlnner short for this project.FOR has Prey show by Oregon a that winds through a restored oak Refuge with a groundbreaking �: - __ --. F`` Maj*,BiologiealMonit©ringVolunteer< b submitted a request to members of the Zoo.Displays by local e aF o, -- ''� savannah,beside open water wetland ceremony to kick off construction of _+ ._ �' Trag Oregon delegation to add$857,000 conservation,habitat 9 g g Phase I visitor service facilities. The _. �- „4+.NR� --- --� May 15:Annual Songbird Festival and and riparian areas of the Tualatin , restoration and •-�-�' to the Services construction budget event will take place on the Steinborn St—b—UN 99� Fesiivihesat River,out to a wetland observation for the design and engineering of the environmental deck.Environmental education study Unit of the Refuge located on 99W * H�.y „ organizations will ""2tt1.24.1 B1�6Trlpto a urN,M-V ,= Wildlife/Education Center and between King City and Sherwood,OR. �katH.—Dpd sites will be located along the trail and illustrate how the *,Rd,�.k—f dit J4*i,9,:BIde»rdFestivaadministrative building.Staff members The Songbird Festival will run from community is coming (ualatimStse,,,eed xd at overlooks. of our delegation were receptive to 10:00am until 2:30 m,with a break at together to protect the 'll tom;'an merr► r .aie P st,ervood A year wayside exhibit adjacent our request,however the FY 05 Tualatin River 12:30pm for the Groundbreaking. _ to Roy Rogers Road will provide budget will be extremely tight. ri+ern�h rr�ettcigt , �� National and local dignitaries have Watershed. Food and t r seasonal access to the west side of the been invited to participate in the beverages will also be We want to express our gratitude to available from Cuisine du Jour in cooperation .�tlit 11U#Slay Df 0Yery `'° unit.Parking,bike racks,a vault toilet, ceremony. �FfRie#in Pt�blicwel+ ial= Metro,City of Sherwood,local with the Cultural Arts Commission of Sherwood. 9` and viewing areas will make the pin at.Refuge Heed 'art8rs agencies,environmental groups, This is a free family-oriented event and wayside vi sitor-friendly. all ages are invited to come out for a More detailed information about the day's scheduled events and volunteer f� : W Rvy Rogers Rc +errvrx schools and individuals for writing opportunties can be found inside this issue or on the FOR web site at: M This initial phase of development is letters of support for this appropriation day of outdoor activities,food,music, "'i'' "` °tg bein funded with Public Land re nest. bird watching,canoe fides and fun on www.friendsoftualatinrefuue.org g q It's Your Bird Festival! Biological Monitoring Planting for the Future a Here's how you can get involved! Refuge Volunteer Training Set for May 8 Partnership Grows(Trees)on the Steinbom Unit Many volunteers are needed to make this event our best yet!Not only do we The Refuge will be enlisting the assistance of volunteers by Bob Swanson have the usual festival tasks,but this year's groundbreaking ceremony-- for the biological monitoring program again this year. complete with local and national dignitaries--has created even more Last year we had a very successful season with more We had a great winter tree planting season on the opportunities for volunteering.So,don't be shy,you will want to be there. surveys than ever being completed to compliment Steinborn property due to the hard work and planning by Contact Carolyn or another board member to sign up.For more details about baseline data! the refuge staff,the major efforts of Friends of Trees these activities,contact Kim Strassburg.Here's where you can help: (FOT)staff and volunteers and the volunteer work of An extensive plant collection for the Refuge herbarium many FOR members and friends.In November,about 15 p: Y g p Our Own Gem was collected by an enthusiastic group of volunteers FOR members signed up for FOT's crew leader training. Set-Up: and earl Sat.atrt-6 strop volunteers to set u tents,tables, chairs,stage,etc.,under _ idance`ofltefu e staff. guided by botanist Ginny Maffitt.Ginny will again lead g g Joan Patterson Honored The Refuge was chosen as the training site,an added plant collecting trips to continue this great effort. n bonus because trainees planted lots of trees at Stei born Take down:Saturday, 2:30-6 strop volunteers to take it all down again. �, For pearl a decade Joan Patterson Y that day.Four additional plantings were scheduled, has been working tirelessly to turn into Waterbirds were surveyed throughout last summer by Y P Signage Set-Up/Take Dowrnlvohuiteers to put up directional signs. another group of dedicated folks who had fun including one canceled by the January snowstorm and reality the grassroots vision of a another beset b heavy rain which soaked to the skin.The observing waterfowl broods,shorebirds,and wading Y t'Y Eabatctr Set-Dg: 3 voluxat�� e� tt�ungfi:00-9a m) ` greenspace preserved in perpetuity for third FOT's Comrnetnorati 'Tree Planting,an the community of Sherwood and the birds,among others. g Parkin /Shuttle:2 volunteer ftir each 3 hour shift at Home Depot parking annual event offering people an opportunity to plant trees Portland metropolitan area.In fact, In cooperation with Prescott Bluebird Recovery,we in honor of loved ones.Over 100 planters were on hand, area.If we get 6 volunteers the shifts will be shorter. 9:311 am-12:15pm she was one of the earliest members of have added three pairs of boxes here at headquarters man of whom had never been to the Refuge.It offered a and 12:15pm—3:00 pm. Y g the Friends of Tualatin River National in addition to the four pairs at the Oleson Unit.We will great opportunity to expand the base of Refuge support in Wildlife Refuge FOR and has been d —�2. g be continuing all these surveys d may add more 'r Prey: 2 vo unt r ers fr m 11:30am 1 .3 an Birds of P y 1 ee greet o Opm g y y the community.The final planting day dawned gorgeous, a vocal advocate for the Refuge ever diversity.There is tree survival monitoring and sunny,andspringlike.All a ed that the final results are FOR Table and Command Center:'.4 enthusiastic FOR members are since.Duringher ears on the FOR Yra Y vegetation transects to complete also. nothing short of spectacular and everyone involved should needed throughout the day.With,81 there will be 2 shifts. Board,her accomplishments have P . feel a seat sense of satisfaction_ been many and her energy seemingly There is a place for everyone to contribute no matter g Native Plant Sale: 1-2 native plant knowledgeable people are needed to i what our skill level!So come take advantage of this ► assist our plant JohnFemauer. limitless.Today,the Refuge is an Y But,the work is not over The newly established roots of g excellent example of community great opportunity to spend some time on your Refuge these trees will be no match for dry summer soil,so we'll Spotting Scopes: -3 voltattt untthe day. y, partnerships working toward a and contribute to important biological need to nurture them with water for a year or two.A new �, �' common goal of protecting the Tualatin databases.I will be holding an water tender donated to the Refuge by FOR will spare us Activities: databases. River watershed.This is thanks in orientation and training session many backaches,but we'll still need volunteers to carry great measure to the dedication, for new and returning buckets!Mulching,weeding,and other maintenance will Gyotaku(fish printing): 2 volunteers _ g g' Aquatic Life: 1 4 persistence,and passion of Joan volunteers on Saturday May 8, also be required.If you'd like to help these trees survive, Patterson. from 9-noon at headquarters.For send me an email at swanson.b@ eomeast.net and I'll'put BirdBokBuilding. 3 `* Wood Duck Puppets: 2 ** further information contact Pete you on the notification list for volunteer work projects.. In recognition of her contributions,the Schmidt,Wildlife Biologist 503-590-5811, HabitatStampmg 2. ** Tualatin Riverkeepers has honored - peter_schmidt@fws.gov.Extra ° ' 2 Joan with their Green Heron Award in IM$I]irmatiod. 1 `* the Individual category.The members rm to This! of FOR congratulate and thank her! ap Cake end Coffee;_ 2� r . Joan and other award winners will be Our fellow Friends group on the Mighty Columbia still has a x recognized at Tualatin Riverkeepers limited number of the beautiful National Wildlife Refuge aaro9 annual Green Heron Awards Dinner Centennial Commemorative Blankets available for purchase. � and Auction on May 1 at the Tualatin This specially-designed Pendleton woolen blanket KtmStnssbiarg 503 590- Ra1 Country Club.Ticket information and commemorating the 100th anniversary of the refuge system ,, _ b t details are available at (featured in the Spring 2003 FOR newsletter)is a great gift www.tualatinriverkeepers.org.All for conservationists,Refuge supporters,and those loved FOR members are encouraged to ones that are prone to catching chills!See a description and FOR has donated $4000 to the Refuge J h come cheer Joan on and support our dowload an order form at:www nwr.mcna wa.us. for the purchase of a 500-gallon water PP rY• P 9 conservation partner TRK while Proceeds from sales support the activities of the Friends of tender. Come see it this summer! you're at it! Mid-Columbia Refuges. Blydln TI'I BlueFestival Bluebird Ftil on the Winqs of change... J p Malheur NWR with Refuge Partner Hosts June Event Tualatin River Doug Robberson Once you've gotten hooked on bird festivals,which we know you will,check out the Champoeg Bluebird Festival on Saturday,June 19th from l Oam to 3pm at R ��'�� ' May 20- 23, 2004 Champoeg State Park.Hosted by the Prescott Bluebird Recovery,the event will Songbird Birding officionado Doug include viewing live birds,eating blueberry refreshments Robberson will be leading a trip = in the Pavilion near the Willamette River,visits to an 860's Kitchen Garden, slide presentations in the to one of Oregon's birding Groundbreakinqjewels. � Visitor's Center,assembling a nesting box in the historic Donald Manson barn,and opportunities to purchase Roundtrip itinerary will take c arts and crafts from exhibiting artists. participants through the Ochoco � Cere m ony Mountains,Painted Desert,John These events are free and open to the public.A$3 Day,Seneca,(with an overnight © parking fee is required at Champoeg,which is located ••• A Vision Takes Fliqht! stay in Burns)and the Metolius on the Willamette River about six miles west of I-5. River.During a2-night stay at the • . - Scheduled Events For more information: Malheur Field Station, Charr�Poeg State Heritage Area.5036781251 x 22 participants will explore the You might just catch a flcuh 503.678.1251 Bird Walks 6:30am and 8:30am. Look and Listen for migratory songbirds rY Pro e. For Prescott Bluebird Recovery Project.503.245.8449, on the Dennis, Steinborn, or Nau ock Units of the Refuge.wildlife to be found at Malheur c f brilliant blue as a J j 9 bluebird whizzes past! www.prescottbluebird.com � _ � _ more information, go to www.friendsoftualatinrefuge.org or call NWR and in the Alvord Desert 503.972.7714 (Dennis, Steinborn, Naujock) and Fields area.Contact Doug ■ //ms� s �� Canoe Trips 11:00am and 2:00pm. Float a stretch of the Tualatin River directly at 503.684.3266 or �Tak It to they • • adjacent to the Refuge with guides from the Tualatin - Riverkeepers. Canoes provided or bring your own. Call dlrobbo@COmCast.netwith Boar(�WnbersVisitLegiS��f31"$ � r�'� � �' 503.590.5813 for reservations. questions and for more • Habitat Walks 10:00am, 10:30am, 11:00, and 1:30pm. Join a guided walk on information about lodging and Joan Pattet'son and North Penner er,, g g the Steinbom Unit and learn about the wetland, riparian forest, meal costs.Transportation will be aITtU2l�', entat�ves fk�gTrt�5 na#d�ttla� � � w � � � �' and oak savannah habitats that coexist on the Refuge. via carpool,and there is a$10/ wil fe�� n aids.t?2 c`iI11Za � �� Birds of Prey 11:30am 12:15pm. See majestic birds up close and team about person organization fee. met nth t it egislatom �promote a� • . their role in the environment. Presented by the Oregon Zoo Maximum of 16 participants, million ut t'ease tothe cnppled Refuge • Groundbreaking including leader. System budget,which has a$2 bdlioti Ceremony 12:30-1:15pm. Join us as we celebrate the future of the Refuge! National and local dignitaries have been invited to furlCtng7il og• throw the first shovelsful of earth kicking off construction of the visitor facilities! Cake and refreshments will follow. Live Music 1:15pm-2:30pm. By Trashcan Joe. Enjoy the view while ❑ I want to join/renew my membership to the Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge ' ' ' ' grooving to the sound of homemade instruments fashioned from trashcans and washtubs! � ❑ This is a gift membership from: for: � All-Day 1 1 Sponsored by: Activities ' Name— ---------- -------- ---------- --------- Date ------------- ------- -- ----- U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Friends of the Refuge Wild Things A variety of hands-on activities introducing old and young to ( Address �____________ ' Tualatin Riverkeepers the wildlife and habitats of the Refuge. Get your face painted ------------------------------ ---------------- Metro like your favorite wild thing! Phone (home) — (work) — — (e-mail) ; Birdhouses Build your own real birdhouse specially designed for n�tawtcm.�e �*�wN,kb �_��; migratory birds. Areas of Interest Conservation Imo ' Corner Learn what local groups are doing to protect and restore the I am interested in volunteer opportunities ❑Yes ❑No Does your employer match donations?❑Yes ❑ No Tualatin River Watershed. Plant Sale Learn about native flora and bring home plants that will attract Please make check payable to Friends of the Refuge and send to PO Box 1306, Sherwood, OR 97140 wildlife to your yard. Food Fest Nourish your body with food and beverages from Cuisine du O ❑Individual/Family$25 ❑ Senior/Student$15 TUALATIN .a., .,�METRO Jour in cooperation with the Cultural Arts Commission of ❑ Patron $50 ❑ Corporate/Agency/Organization$100 Riverkeepers -°m;"e';"' Sherwood. 9 Blue Goose The mascot of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the Blue Goose,will stop by to visit with festival goers.A great photo op! ■ tumbled volcanic rock. Sedges,grasses reach of Rock Creek should some day �P-T 10 NAZ Life in the Seablands and reeds,willow,dogwood,ash lie be restored to marsh habitat. It won't FriendstheRefuge Reflections of a Wildlife Steward bordered by pine,fir,alder,big leaf and be easy. On the upside though, because Q vine maple, Oregon grape and salal. the stream in this area is well > Of r -n While pursuing his Watershed The beavers that created the marsh connected to the riparian zone, the M were like] one but their public works streambed will not need cost] work. Natmive Plant Steward credentials, FOR member Y g P y � achievements remained to welcome And the upstream portions of Rock m Carl Axelson turned to Tualatin J -n their return in better times. Creek,while hardly pristine,are still Q C River NWR for his study below retail prices!!! site. Here are his good candidates for protection observations. and restoration. But there is that Reed Canarygrass - a big During Songbird Festival Scabs.That's what it looks but a beatable problem.RCG Saturday, May 15, 2004 like. Broken heaps of red, is being eradicated elsewhere gray,and black rock. through a variety of methods Sherwood's Rock Creek such as year round flooding, 10:00am-2:30pm flows from up on Parrett plowing and burning,mowing Mountain down into these and flailing,timely herbicide Spring is a great time to add native plants to your yard while you support FOR! Proceeds Tonquin Seablands and applications,even hand pulling from this sale benefit FOR, the grassroots volunteer organization established to support the eventually makes its way and then vegetation with the Tualatin.Hiding out thee re, natives to sshahade out RCG development of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge and provide educational opportunities to the just southeast of town, lies a regeneration. RCG seed floats, public.You won't find them for these prices at any nursery, so fill your trunk and head for the nice little opportunity to so upstream RCG will reseed backyard!! demonstrate a success that Refuge lands and have to be Ferns sprout from the rocky scablands, sheltering a tiny waterfall. tackled for a long time. could lead the way to g An assortment of the following plants will be available from Bosky Dell Natives the day of the sale.If you'd like to learn I restoration and preservation Chips indicate that a few beaver are Wetlands upstream of Bissell of a singular wetland corridor. might be candidates for conservation 1 more about them and their planting conditions before you buy them,check out www.boskydellnatives.com.All plant 1 back but Reed Canarygrass has easements someday. sales are subject to availability.You can use this form to pre-order(send no$). Rock Creek is unique among arrived as well. Reed Send e-mail with choices to Sherwood's three streams. Like a Canarygrass(RCG) was introduced in A combination of restoration strategies john@curvetta.com coyote it warily circles outside the the West as fodder but proved coupled with persistence can work Name Date Or send form to: i urban growth boundary. Its flow enters unpalatable to most grazers.RCG here. The riparian portions of the ' John Feinauer ' flat bottomlands along Tonquin Road loved it here though-flooded in the Bissell Parcel stand as a distinct ' 3800 NE Zimri Drive ' unaffected by impervious surface winter,dry in the summer.RCG drove possibility to become demonstration Newberg, OR 97132-7239 runoff from Sherwood's development. out native vegetation in the riparian marsh habitat illustrating the variety of 3 % 2 POTS ($2.50) TREES (2 gal, $10) 1 Thanks to the early work of beavers, zone.As plant diversity failed,animal benefits gained from plant and animal the riparian zone at this reach is well diversity in the soil and water and on diversity adjacent to urban areas. ❑Coastal Strawberry ❑Madrone(Arbutus)($20) ❑Wine Maple ❑Red Alder ; connected to the stream and floods the land declined as well. Restoration and protection for Rock readily each winter,enriching the soil Creek fits well into Metro's With an eye to possibilities,The conservation philosophy, ❑Oregon Stonecrop []Black Hawthorn ❑Oregon Ash []Western Crabapple and managing flow intensity.Summer greenspaces P P Y, ^^ ^ and early fall flow is retained, Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge as well as the Refuge's mission for QSessile Trillium($5) ❑Cascara D'acific Willow ❑Scouler's Willow maintaining a damp environment in the acquisition boundaries include 159 acres wildlife.The City of Sherwood too is along Rock Creek of which 80 acres committed to health streams and dry season benefiting amphibians and Y ❑Wake Robin Trillium $5 have been acquired.The Bissell (Trillium)( ) other soil denizens. greenspaces. 1 (1 gal, $5) ❑Red Osier Dogwood Maidenhair fern`; ❑Western Hemlock � Parcel,at thirty-eight acres, and the 1 ❑Tall Oregon Grape($3.50) Of the two corridors between the Claus Parcels lie along Tonquin Road How about a nice soggy native marsh � Tualatin and Willamette Valleys,only mixed with private pieces.We seldom habitat restored and protected - and Z this one remains riparian and relatively ponder those upper-mid Rock Creek some resident beaver-to inspire other FERNS (1 gal, $5) SHRUBS (1 gal, $5) units of the Refine though.For one successes like it? Perhaps the Tonquin undeveloped.These ribbons of green b g P q ❑Deer Fern as Audubon calls them,even when thing,the area is in pretty bad shape. Scabland wetland habitat,today a ❑Mock Orange OP Nine k tkaxR surrounded by development,function The sounds of the scablands are restoration stepchild,will someday be a ❑Sword Fern7 Nbeneficially forbirds,amphibians,fish, gunshots,rock quarries,yelping dogs, member of Sherwood's family of _16 A❑Salmonbetry ❑Birch Leaf Splant and animal diversity and for and trucks.Attention-getting flocks of natural showplaces and an Request Other Plants f people. waterfowl and shorebirds seek the environmental education resource for Below: ❑Western Spireaax larger, safer Refuge lands. the Refuge. t IImagine Rock Creek in 1852.Field It (Z gal, $10) ❑Servicebetry ❑Common Sn ` " �' � usflrattbe� notes from the l 852 Survey speak of a If predevelopment conditions are the : ' =,' ._ narrow,low and marshy valley sided by goal for wetlands then the scablands m� � �. A REFUGE FROM THE CITY Following restoration, the permanent and seasonal The lands, waters, and wildlife in the Refuge will wetlands, grasslands, coniferous forests and provide unique and exciting recreational and .. . riparian areas will support an amazing diversity educational opportunities. %. and abundance of wildlife. a ' The Refuge will benefit the region by improving1,L . Trails that blend into the wild scenery will deliver water quality and flood control, reducing erosion you to the Wildlife Center, overlooks, wildlife and siltation, and mitigating impacts from T � observation structures, and outdoor study sites. surrounding urban activities. e RE"E RREA •�^* r�Rlver as �z platin Rivet ��K,- _ Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge � o LEGEND For access or tours, call � ® Refuge Lands Acquired Friends Of the Refuge 9 o p gg at 503-972-7714 O r ® Refuge Acquisition Boundary W o Cn m Sherwood tidal jaded paioAoaJ uo paluiJd WHO ARE WE? TUALATIN RIVER NATIONAL WHAT CAN YOU DO? WILDLIFE REFUGE W Friends Of the Refuge (FOR) is a community- Join FOR, and seize the opportunity to participate based volunteer organization supporting the Tualatin The City of Sherwood,Oregon and area residents are in creating and preserving this legacy. You can fi, 8 River National Wildlife Refuge. FOR is dedicated working to conserve natural areas within the flood- work with others to: G to protection and restoration of the Refuge for the plain and along stream tributaries of the Tualatin W "" p Cs 0, benefit of fish and wildlife, and for public education River bordered by Sherwood, Tualatin, Scholls, ♦ Promote awareness of the Refuge a O and recreation. Tigard, and King City. This grassroots movement has unprecedented support from local governments, ♦ Participate in educational programs Q Q• WHAT ARE FOR'S GOALS? businesses, environmental groups, civic organiza- ; N Guide auto, walking,and canoe tours tions, and the agricultural community. The U. S. ♦ of the Refuge FOR's priorities are to increase the visibility of Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Oregon's ; a; ^ the Refuge, form beneficial partnerships, create congressional representatives support this effort and ♦ Help restore native plant communities educational and recreational opportunities, and initiated the governmental actions to create this O aid in acquisition of lands. FOR pursues its goals urban National Wildlife Refuge. ♦ Research the history of the Refuge area in partnership with USFWS and other agencies, Q 00 p In the early 1990s, the USFWS recommended ♦ Raise funds for Refuge projects and organizations, and individuals. We invite concerned g p � Z �' `� acquisition of about 3,000 acres of land from will- o 'a-4 citizens to join us in nurturing this natural legacy in a urge government representatives to a 0 ing sellers within the Refuge boundary. support funding W r. � region experiencing rapid urban growth. pp g The Refuge was officially established in 1992 when If ou care about wildlife and the outdoors, and want ♦ Conduct wildlife and vegetation surveys ~p/, � o � y a 12-acre parcel was donated. As a result of subse- fi to protect and restore a portion of the Tualatin River quent land acquisition, the Refuge currently encom- ; Z ClGU ♦ Clean up Refuge property . floodplain,join FOR. Our monthly meeting is held o passes over 1,000 acres and a USFWS Refuge on the Refuge, for more information call our voice manager is on site. Continued support is needed ♦ Plan and build trails and interpretive sites mail number at 503-972-7714. for land acquisition, habitat restoration, construc- Q >1 tion of facilities, and management of the Refuge. ♦ Coordinate activities with other groups a i O O Members receive FOR's newsletters and special x 3 N guided Refuge tours. Gi. a >, Q o o N •— O �.i '18 C .0� > Q.4 i d Photos b Y Jane Foreman Z U a W Photo by Michael Wilhelm ; tl U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service W, Fact Sheet S Tualatin River CC[BilRATINC A ----- ---National_ Wild l ife-Refu e rKEx VTURYc»`sH:avarioN hnbians and re s also use the Land and Wildlife � tile P Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge Refuge.Threatened and sensitive is located within the floodplain of the species which frequent the area include Date Established Tualatin River basin near Sherwood, peregrine falcon,bald eagle,western 1992 Oregon.Its topography is pond turtle,dusky Canada goose, predominantly flat bottom land bordered northern red legged frog and winter Refuge Size by uplands,and characterized by rivers steelhead. 3,058 acres-approved boundary and streams,wetlands,riparian History of Establishment 1,218 acres-acquired as of March 2004 wands.grasslands,and forested In the early IM,the U.S.Fish and q uplands.Refuge habitats include Wildlife Service began studying the idea 50 acres-managed under agreement floodplain,seasonal emergent,forested, to create a National Wildlife Refuge with Metro and scrub-shrub wetlands,Oregon ash along the bottomlands of the Tualatin riparian hardwood and conifer forests, River.Many local residents and leaders and oak pine communities.They are among the best representative examples recognized that the river and its Contact- had been highly modified of these severely depleted habitats floodplain fied by Tualatin River NWR remaining in the Willamette Valley. both agricultarre and urbanization within 16507 Roy Rogers Road Washington County.This recognition. Sherwood,OR 97140 When flooded in fall and winter,the fueled a desire to preserve open 503.590.5811 Tualatin River floodplain wetlands greenspace and create an area where 503.590.6702 fax support thousands of ducks,arctic- future generations could enjoy outdoor nesting Canada geese,tundra swans, recreation and interpretation,and leave and a variety of other waterbirds. an educational legacy for children.The Dominant ducks consist of northern Service identified a need to protect and pintail,green-winged teal,mallard,and enhance floodplains,wetlands,riparian Amerman wigeon.Canada geese include habitats,and upland buffers for a variety dusky and cackling sub-spears.Tualatin of wildlife and for the ergoyinent of River NWR supports significant people.An Environmental Assessment breeding populations of wood ducks and identified several options for protection of hooded mergansers and,to a lesser the area.Tb a study culminated in a extent,anuarrron teal,blue-winged teal, decision,issued in February of 1992,to and mallards. The Refuge is an important breeding area for neotropical migratory birds as well.Mammals that use the Refuge include deer,coyotes,beavers, river otters,and numerous small rodents.Several species The Refuge supports large numbers of wintering waterfowl. create the Tualatin River National million and come from a variety of Wildlife Refuge by acquiring and saws,including the Land and Water managing up to 3058 acres of land by fee Conservation Fund,flood relief Rinds, title purchase,conservation easement and federal hydroelectric power and/or agreement. mitigation funds.A total of 1790 acres remain to be protected within the Acquisition Authorities appruvep boundary. Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929:"...for use as an inviolate Refuge Goals sanctuary, or for arty other- #Protect and restore a diversity of native-. management purpose,for migratory habitats and associated populations of birds...." indigenous fish,wildlife,invertebrate, Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956."...for the and punt species of the Tualatin River basin. development,advancement, management,conservation,and *Provide high quality opporttuzities for protection of fish and wildlife wipolands and wildlife-dependent 1 resources.-"and".»for the benefit of recreation and environmental education the United States Fish and Wildlife to enhance public appreciation, Service,in performing its activities and understanding,and enjoyment of refuge services:' fish,wildlife,habitats,and cultural Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of resources with an emphasis toward Members ofSherwood Middle School 1986:"».the conservation of the urban residents. Refuge Club spot wildlife in wetlands wetlands of the Nation in order to *Protect,restore,and develop a diversity Public Use The protection of fish and wildlife and maintain the public benefits they provide of habitats for migratory birds such as and to help fulfill international neotropical songbirds,wading birds,and their habitats on the Refuge will provide obligations contained in various shorebirds with special emphasis m the public withwildlife-oriented migratory bird treaties and wintering waterfowl recreation,education,and interpretation conventions...." opportunities.This will help foster *Protect and restore floodplain type environmental awareness to develop an Acquisition Status benefits associated with the Thalatin informed and involved citizenry that will. The approved acquisition boundary River including water quality,flood support fish and wildlife conservation. incorporates 3,058 acnes.Acquisitions storage,and water recharge. Construction of visitor service facilities have been and will be obtained only from on the Refuge is scheduled to begin in willing sellers.An initial 12-acre private or and otherwise rrestore,and develop habitats Summer 2004 and will include an donation established the Refuge in 1993. for aendangered d and recovery of entrance road and parking area,nature From 1994 through 2004,1256 more federally �endangeretrails,wildlife observation overlooks, threatened species and help prevent the interpretive p� blind acres have been protected for a currentpanels,P to1rphy total of 1268 acres.Appropriated funds listing er candidate species and species of and environmental education sturdy sites. for the acquisition program total$10.4 management concern An environmental education shelter and 1 .,. a fishing platformhIver overlook are also k~ ' planned and will be constructed as funds are available.Additionally,a wildlife center,complete with a multi- Pl purpose room,environmental education classrooms,interpretive exhibits,and adjoining offices is also envisioned for the Refuge.People of all ages will experience the beauty of the Thalatin River Valley,view abundant wildlife,and discover what historic landscapes looked Eke prior to settlement.It will be an ideal setting for the public to enjoy a variety of bands-on educational programs and to `=r learn about wildlife management at Riparian forest habitat along Tualatin River Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge. TUALATIN RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ' Washington County, Oregon _ Land Acquisitions Status 2003 72-1 t r d REFUG 4R6A e Scholls Sherwood Rd I ti G 'min-S4�e R r r - tiar 'a3 `+� r Acquisition Boundary l ® r - Refuge Lands Acquired f ® METRO Property ® METRO property managed by USFWS 4"W U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Americas N Wildlife R Celebrating a Century of Conservation Commemorating a Pivotal Moment in History March 14,2003 marks a milestone in the history of wildlife conservation in � w America—the Centennial anniversary of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The National Wildlife Refuge System " is America's only network of federal c . lands dedicated specifically to wildlife conservation, representing a steadfast commitment to protecting " our wild heritage. President Theodore Roosevelt fostered this conservation legacy when in If)03 he set aside tiny Pelican Island on Florida's East Coast as a refuge for birds.What has become the National Wildlife Refuge System now includes more than 530 refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas,spanning nearly 94 million acres across the United States and its territories. 1 A Network of Wildlife Habitats USFWS Photo by:Jim Clark, This vast network of prime habitats gives hundreds of critically endangered safeguards plants and animals of More than 35 million Americans visit species a chance to recover,provides virtually every variety,from cactus to national wildlife refuges each year to stepping stones for millions of migrating caribou,butterflies to bison,and salmon enjoy unique outdoor experiences. birds,and protects premier fisheries. to songbirds. Most people come during peak periods The National Wildlife Refuge System of bird migration,when refuges are As the land management arm of the thriving with wildlife. Hundreds of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,the thousands of schoolchildren visit National Wildlife Refuge System national wildlife refuges each year to F-` helps fulfill a critical part of the learn more about our natural world. + > agency's overarching mission: to Sportsmen come to fish or hunt,while ' conserve the nature of America by others savor the solitude of these + protecting fish,wildlife, plants, and special places. their habitats for the continuing ^«, ' benefit of the American people. And over the last several years, more and more people and a variety Scenic Getaways for People of organizations have united to protect The National Wildlife Refuge System and strengthen the National Wildlife appeals to strong cultural traditions of Refuge System.This surge in support American society, such as enjoying the is most visible through new legislation wonders of the outdoors and ensuring and other Congressional action, and USFws Photo by:Robert Twist wild,open space for future generations. growth in community advocacy, � , r µ` �o k� w s 4�� Kyt „ kh� m - ,..` + a i n.. an .... x ..r 47 =MOP r- n. USFWS Photo by:Steve Chase volunteerism, and partnerships. Poised for a New Century A Lasting Legacy However, a large segment of the The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is These special efforts maximize American people have yet to undertaking a number of special, the potential of the National Wildlife discover their National Wildlife nationwide efforts to strengthen the Refuge System's Centennial Refuge System. National Wildlife Refuge System, and anniversary, to give future generations will use the Centennial anniversary as of Americans respect and pride for a unique opportunity to build broad our natural heritage, and ensure public understanding and appreciation Theodore Roosevelt's conservation for these conservation lands and their legacy will be even stronger in its value to society. next century. The National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act of 2000 paves the way for a special, nationwide outreach campaign.The law calls for a Centennial Commission of distinguished individuals to leverage with partners in carrying out the outreach campaign.The law also calls for a long-term plan to address the ?° major operations,maintenance,and construction needs of the National Wildlife Refuge System. �f These centennial activities will help . broaden visibility, strengthen " partnerships, and fortify facilities and programs for wildlife and habitat conservation and recreation. They will build a stronghold of support for the USFWS Photo by:George Gentry National Wildlife Refuge System to USFWS Photo by.-Karen Hollingswa th. sustain it in a new era of both challenge and opportunity. * U.S.Government Printing Office:2001-845-506