Arkansas Administrative Code Agency 236 - ARKANSAS STATE TREASURER
The Arkansas Administrative Code, particularly for Agency 233 - Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism, contains various regulations and provisions aimed at the operation, governance, and oversight of Arkansas’s parks, heritage sites, and tourism activities. These regulations cover a wide range of topics, from operational procedures to resource protection and public safety. Below are some key areas with examples of regulatory cases that have shaped the framework of this department.
1. Management and Operation of State Parks
One of the core responsibilities of the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism is the oversight and management of Arkansas’s state parks. This includes setting regulations for park use, environmental protections, and visitor safety.
Case: The Establishment of the Ozark Folk Center State Park
In the early 1970s, the creation of the Ozark Folk Center State Park was a significant case where the department’s regulations focused on preserving the cultural heritage of the Ozarks. The park was established to preserve and promote the traditional arts, crafts, and music of the region. The regulations associated with this case helped guide how public and private entities collaborate in the preservation of local heritage and how tourism can be incorporated to boost local economies.
Regulation Involved:
Preservation of traditional folk art.
Rules for conducting demonstrations of arts and crafts.
Operational guidelines for hosting public events while maintaining the cultural integrity of the park.
2. Preservation of Historic Sites
The Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism also manages numerous historic sites and places of significance to Arkansas's history. Regulations related to these historic sites ensure that they are protected, accurately represented, and accessible to the public.
Case: The Historic Preservation Program
The Historic Preservation Program allows federal and state funding to be used for preserving historic buildings, sites, and structures. This program's case law involved assessing which buildings and properties were eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The legal challenge in this case came from balancing the need to preserve the integrity of historic sites while encouraging development or modification in ways that meet modern needs.
Regulation Involved:
Criteria for nominating and maintaining properties on the National Register.
Procedures for property owners applying for tax incentives for rehabilitation.
Zoning and construction regulations to preserve the authenticity of historic buildings.
3. Tourism Marketing and Development
As tourism plays a critical role in Arkansas’s economy, the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism is involved in implementing marketing strategies to attract visitors, both from within the state and beyond.
Case: The Arkansas Tourism Promotion Act
In 1985, the Arkansas state government passed the Tourism Promotion Act, creating significant legal guidelines for how tourism marketing funds are used. One key regulation in this act was that marketing funds could not be used for purely commercial purposes but had to have a clear connection to enhancing the state’s reputation as a tourism destination. Cases that arose from this law often involved disputes about how public funds were spent and which entities had the right to access promotional funds.
Regulation Involved:
Legal standards on what qualifies as tourism promotion.
Restrictions on the use of state funds for tourism-related advertising.
The process by which tourism boards or non-profit organizations could apply for grants.
4. Wildlife and Natural Resource Conservation
The Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism is also heavily involved in ensuring that the state’s natural resources and wildlife are protected. Regulations around hunting, fishing, and land conservation are particularly important.
Case: Regulations for Wildlife Habitat and Conservation Areas
A well-known case in Arkansas concerning the Department’s conservation efforts came from the Wilderness Protection Act which led to the establishment of conservation areas, such as the Caney Creek Wilderness Area. A key case here involved local landowners disputing the zoning laws that restricted their use of property near these protected areas. The case centered on how far-reaching the conservation efforts could go without infringing on the rights of private landowners.
Regulation Involved:
The definition and scope of wilderness areas and protected zones.
Legal disputes over land use near protected natural resources.
Requirements for federal approval to change the status of protected areas.
5. Public Safety and Park Regulations
The department also has to ensure the safety of visitors in state parks, which involves regulations governing everything from alcohol consumption to wildlife interaction and emergency response protocols.
Case: Regulations on Alcohol Consumption in Parks
A significant case emerged around the legalities of alcohol consumption within state parks. In one case, local park authorities faced opposition after implementing a new rule that banned alcohol in certain parks. This policy faced resistance from local businesses that argued it would deter tourists from visiting areas known for having alcohol-related events, such as festivals or tailgates.
Regulation Involved:
Restrictions on alcohol in public parks.
Legal processes for granting exceptions or permits for alcohol-related events.
Balancing public safety concerns with tourism interests and local economies.
6. Park Fees and User Access
Another area governed by the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism involves the fees collected for the use of state parks and heritage sites. In 2010, a key case arose around whether the Department could increase entry fees for state parks, particularly in light of budget shortfalls.
Case: The 2010 Fee Increase Challenge
The 2010 Fee Increase for state park entry fees led to a lawsuit from a group of state park users, arguing that the fee hikes disproportionately impacted lower-income families. The department defended the increases by demonstrating how the revenue would support necessary infrastructure improvements and maintenance within the parks.
Regulation Involved:
Legal standards for implementing fee increases.
Public access to parks and fee waivers for certain populations.
How fee increases align with the overall mission of the Department.
These cases show how the Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism balances preservation with development, ensuring the protection of Arkansas’s cultural and natural resources while fostering tourism and economic growth.
RELATED Blog
comments