Research team briefs commission on statewide outdoor recreation plan, funding map and shared‑stewardship options

Dr. Jordan Smith of the Institute of Tourism and Outdoor Recreation told the Utah Outdoor Adventure Commission the research team has compiled data from seven regional stakeholder workshops to inform a statewide outdoor recreation strategic plan and a public assets database.

"Data and information really feed the decisions of the Outdoor Adventure Commission," Smith said, summarizing the project’s goal to use workshop input and GIS assets to shape near‑ and long‑term recommendations for legislative and grant priorities. The team categorized state funding streams into six buckets — education, maintenance, infrastructure, marketing/promotion, research and other — and produced a funding map showing which programs and accounts currently support outdoor recreation across the state.

Workshop participants and commission members repeatedly flagged four common threats: (1) limited interagency collaboration across federal, state and local land managers; (2) insufficient, centralized information for visitors and project applicants; (3) crowding at popular sites while other assets remain underused; and (4) uneven distribution of recreation-driven economic benefits concentrated along the Wasatch Front.

To address those challenges, Smith and commissioners discussed several state‑level models: a recreation‑specific shared‑stewardship agreement to leverage federal matching funds and align maintenance priorities (similar to an existing forest‑manager shared stewardship program), a pooled funding mechanism modeled on the Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRI) to coordinate multi‑agency investments, and a geographically distributed regional council approach like Colorado’s Outdoor Partnerships for localized prioritization of projects.

Commissioners also urged developing a single, state‑owned recreation data repository or API, with some members suggesting the state provide the back‑end data while allowing private apps to surface information to users. Examples referenced included the Onyx mapping tool and Nevada’s publicly owned map project. Several commissioners recommended inviting WRI or shared‑stewardship program leads to a future meeting and fast‑tracking comparative analysis for possible legislative recommendations in the upcoming session.

Next steps identified at the meeting included continuing to compile regional asset maps, conducting a comparative analysis of precedents in other states, inviting federal and program leaders to brief the commission, and revisiting potential legislative language if the commission wishes to advance shared‑stewardship or pooled‑fund models.