 |
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO | Staff | Links |
|
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO | Staff | Links |
|
Vandalism
By Dr. Dwight McCurdy and Harold E. Johnson PARKLAND VANDALS are costing taxpayers millions of dollars each year. It has often been reported that this vandalism is growing more rapidly than our population. As a result, park administrators must divert monies intended for recreation programs and new facilities, to emending the acts of vandalism. During the summer of 1970, we studied the types of vandalism (1) occuring most frequently, (2) costing the most to correct, and (3) having the greatest negative effects on the quality of the visitors' experience at state parks in southern Illinois. In addition, vandal socio-economic characteristics and possible remedial actions were also investigated. Park personnel (district coordinator, rangers, and maintenance employees) and 100 park visitors were interviewed at the following areas:
STATE PARKS
CONSERVATION AREAS
For this study, vandalism was defined as the defacement, mutiliation, or destruction of private or public property either knowingly or unknowingly by an individual or group of individuals not having direct ownership in the property so abused. The following acts of vandalism were studied: 1. Littering 2. Damage to or defacement of picnic tables 3. Damage to or removal of firegrills 4. Damage to windows 5. Damage to or defacement of vegetation or natural features 6. Damage to drinking fountains or pumps 7. Damage to lights 8. Sign damage 9. Damage to or defacement of facilities (excluding buildings) 10. Damage to or defacement of equipment (excluding benches, tables, or grills) 11. Damage to or defacement of building interiors (excluding restrooms, toilets, dressing rooms, or showers) 12. Damage to or defacement of restrooms, toilets, dressing rooms, and showers 13. Damage to or defacement of building exteriors (excluding windows) 14. Damage to equipment owned by patrons 15. Other A most interesting finding was that fifty-three percent of the park visitors said they did not see any vandalism. Generally, these people were visiting areas with extensive vandalism present. In some cases, the visitors when interviewed, were within view of several acts of vandalism. VANDALISM OCCURING MOST FREQUENTLY Littering was the most frequent act of vandalism reported by both park personnel and park visitors. Other acts re-occurring often were damage to (1) natural features, (2) restrooms, etc. and (3) benches and tables, and (4) signs. These types of vandalism were also most often during an on-site inspection conducted at each area. ACTS OF VANDALISM MOST COSTLY TO EMEND In the opinion of respondents, littering and damage to natural features were the most expensive vandalism to correct. Although not recognized by the park visitors, sign damage was reported by the park personnel to require large sums of money. Damage to (1) restrooms, etc., (2) picnic tables, and (3) building interiors were also frequently mentioned. Dr. McCurdy and Harold Johnson are on the staff of the Dept. of Forestry, Southern Illinois University. continued on page 31 Illinois Parks and Recreation 18 July/August, 1972 VANDALISM continued from page 18 VANDALISM HAVING GREATEST NEGATIVE EFFECTS Littering was said to have the greatest negative impact on the quality of the visitors' experience. Damage to (1) restrooms, etc., (2) picnic tables, and (3) natural vegetation were also frequently mentioned by the park visitors and park personnel interviewed. CHARACTERISTICS OF VANDALS The park visitors and park personnel, were asked to give the age, sex and residence (urban or rural) of those people most likely to commit the major acts of vandalism. Although teenage males were thought to do most of the vandalism, littering was said to be done equally by all age groups of both sexes. Whether or not a teenager (or any person) has a rural or urban residence, in the opinion of interviewees, does not effect their likelihood of committing vandalism. SUGGESTED REMEDIAL ACTIONS Littering. Park visitors and park personnel believed that more strict law enforcement and stiffer penalities would reduce littering. Park visitors said most of the areas did not have a sufficient number of well-placed trash receptacles. In addition, the respondents favored a public education program explaining the costs, effects and people's responsibilities in littering. Damage to restrooms, picnic tables, signs, etc. Increased patrols and lighting was thought by interviewees to be the most effective way of reducing vandalism of facilities. In addition, they said the materials used in construction should be more "vandal proof." Vandal proof materials suggested were concrete, metals, fiberglass and heavy wood. Damage to natural features. Again, increased patrols was said by respondents to be the best method of reducing damage to vegetation. Improving public education programs for informing the park visitor as to importance and fragility of natural features was also suggested. SUMMARY
The findings of this study were: 1. Park visitors, generally, are not aware of vandalism. The visitors either have become accustom to vandalism and/or it doesn't cause a negative impact on them. 2. Littering seems to be the act of vandalism (a) occurring most often, (b) requiring the largest expenditures to emend, and (c) having the greatest negative impact on the quality of the visitors experience. The prevalance of littering results from everybody doing it, not a specific segment of the park visitors. 3. The most frequent methods suggested by the interviewees for reducing vandalism were increased law enforcement, better lighting, less-destructive facilities and expanded public education programs. Illinois Parks and Recreation 31 July/August, 1972 |
