Readers continue the discussion over race and class when it comes to camping:
You have to understand it’s not really about cost; it’s also an aversion to sleeping on the ground in the damn woods. My (white) mother grew up well off in a big house with every amenity, and for vacations they drove around in a camper. She thought it was a blast. My (black) father grew up in a very poor household, sharing beds with his brothers and sisters and eating beans from a can. To this day, his idea of a vacation is not a sleeping bag on the ground in a tent, crammed in with his nearest and dearest, fending off bugs. It’s in a nice hotel bed, where people bring you room service and treat you like a king.
I think much of many black people’s aversion to camping stems from that. It’s less about not having the money – there are plenty of middle-class black families that could buy up the camping gear, and we certainly could have afforded it – it’s just that there’s little pleasure in living off the basics when you or your family very recently did just that not for pleasure, but out of necessity.
Add in the racism factor – the reality that until pretty recently, black people actually weren’t even allowed to stay in most nice resorts or hotels – and it makes even more sense why, when they have time and disposable income, they usually don’t pack a rucksack and head into the mountains.
Several more readers speak to those themes:
Long ago, in the early ’70s, my wife and I were leaders at a YMCA summer camp in the Pacific Northwest. We had mixed groups – middle-class suburban kids and lower-income African-American kids. The camp itself had a swimming pool, dining hall and hot showers. But for our kids, the big feature was several days of wilderness camping in tents with food cooked over fires and with no running water. The suburban white kids had already learned that wilderness was cool and they were ready to go. The lower-income kids, on the other hand, appreciated being in a place with all the comforts they probably didn’t have at home.
Another:
Your post reminded me of a study the California Parks Department did about 10 years ago. They found that people of color avoided their parks because they were located in rural areas, and they did not feel comfortable or welcomed in the conservative small towns that are often the gateways to the parks.
Another reader:
Your thread reminds me of one of my favorite “Oprah moments”. In 2010, after receiving a letter from an African-American park ranger at Yosemite National Park who said he was concerned by the low number of African-Americans who visit national parks each year, Oprah and her friend Gayle King went on a camping trip to the park to bring attention to the issue and encourage more African American families to enjoy the parks. I’m not sure she changed many minds, but it made for some interesting television – not to see African-Americans camping, but to see the top 1% camping and “roughing it”. There are some video clips on Oprah’s website, including this one of Oprah and Gayle trying to set up their pop-up camper.
Another points to a wonderful place:
A conversation about camping, minorities, and means would be incomplete if you didn’t mention Prince William Forest Park, which is part of the National Park Service, in northern Virginia. We visited this summer – actually on July 4th – on our return trip from visiting family up north. Not sure what to expect, we went to the park because we needed a day in nature and were traveling with our dog, and my wife had discovered that the park was pet-friendly.
What we found was a 15,000-acre oasis with a history of creating open space for those less fortunate. It was originally formed as part of FDR’s Recreational Development Area program, to help make recreational activities accessible to poor, inner-city kids. The Civilian Conservation Corps built cabins and five camps (no whitewashing: the camps were segregated). Social agencies in the D.C. area – such as the nation’s first African-American YMCA – sent kids to summer camp at the park. Here’s a link to the NPS’s page on the summer camps at the park. From that page, here’s the summation of the historic impact of Prince William Forest Park:
The RDA program left an important social and recreational legacy. The program created new parkland, which was available to all. Less fortunate residents in or near major cities had something similar to national parks, most of which were in the West. The social agencies that rented the cabins had greater opportunity for outreach. The experiences of a summer camp were far beyond the means of many of the children who stayed here. Not only did they get fresh air, but many of the camp programs gave children the opportunity for success later in life. Its legacy continues as visitors continue to use Prince William Forest Park and other former RDAs for their original purpose of recreation.
Importantly, there appears to be a modern opportunity to recapture some of the park’s history of introducing urban kids to the outdoors. The organization NatureBridge has started 3-day residential field science programs for middle school kids at Prince William Forest Park. Check out this link and the [following] video:
The Dish 