Visitation and Physical Activity Intensity at Rural and Urban Parks

Abstract

Less physical activity among rural residents may contribute to health disparities. This study compared park visitation and activity intensity at 15 urban and 15 rural parks matched for acreage and amenities.Parks were observed in the morning, afternoon, and evening on 3 weekdays and 1 weekend day to determine the number of child, teen and adult visitors, their activity intensity (sitting, standing, moderate, or vigorous), and amenity use.A total of 5486 visitors were observed with no differences in the percentages of males (55.5% vs 53.9%) and females (44.5% vs 46.1%) observed in rural and urban parks. Neither the percentages of weekday (82.4% vs 81.9%) nor weekend (17.6% vs 18.1%) visitors differed (p>0.96) between rural and urban parks. The probability of visitors being observed sitting was greater (p<0.02) and the probability to be observed in moderate intensity activity was lower (p<0.003) at rural parks than at urban parks. The probability of children (0‐5 yr) being observed was lower (p<0.001) at a rural park. A greater (p<0.001) proportion of children (25.0% vs 14.5%) in rural parks, but of teens in urban parks (8.0% vs 69.6%) were observed on sport fields. A greater (p<0.001) proportion of adults in urban areas (12.5% vs 46.0%) were observed spectating sports. Greater (p<0.001) proportions of rural children (10.9% vs 3.5%), teens (34.1% vs 12.4%), and adults (38.9% vs 10.1%) were observed using shelters. There were no differences in the proportions of rural and urban visitors observed using courts.With similar numbers and types of amenities available, rural and urban parks are used differently likely due to differences in park programming (e.g., sports). Results from studies of urban parks cannot be wholly applied to the needs of parks in rural communities.