Based on our findings, we offer these insights and recommendations for Dakota County Parks on how to proceed with implementing FPLs in Thompson County Park.
FPL Location
Respondents’ sentiments about where a food productive landscape should go in the park seem to vary. Some express concern about the lack of flat acreage in the park, suggesting that removing a parking lot might be necessary to accommodate traditional gardens. Others worry about the sustainability of more labor-intensive options, fearing Thompson County Park would find it difficult to maintain over time. Additionally, there are concerns about overcrowding in the park, with some suggesting that alternative locations should be considered to avoid overwhelming Thompson Park with more visitors and activities. These sentiments may suggest a need for further exploration of alternative sites.
“I support the idea of community gardens but don’t believe Thompson Park is the right location for them.”
According to the 2020 Thompson County Park Long-Term Master Plan, there is allocated space for a sensory garden in the park, as seen below.
Here are some questions that Thompson County Park could consider:
- Could a different type of garden, such as a community garden, open access garden, or individual plots, be placed in the same area?
- Where would an area of foraging take place?
- How can Dakota County Parks make sure that everyone has equal access to a garden in the future?
It is also important to note that most community gardens in the Twin Cities require a fee to join and are typically individual plots. Many individuals who participated in this survey wanted the garden accessible to all.
If Thompson County Park is not the place for a new food-productive landscape, there are other locations of community gardens in Dakota County:
- Capitol View Communal Orchard & Garden
- Garden on the Hill
- Dodge Nature Center
- Spring Lake Park Reserve
- South St. Paul Community Gardens
- Inver Hills Community Garden
- The Open Door, Garden to Table
- Crosstown East Community Garden
- Neill Park Community Garden
- Wolk Park Community Garden
Community Engagement for FPL Success
A crucial element of an FPL is the presence of committed participants. Dakota County Parks can help build up a community around gardening at Thompson that creates a culture of support for new participants and helps overcome challenges with maintenance and labor, stealing, and vandalism that respondents predicted.
Respondents raised hesitations about gardens falling into disuse if they were not properly maintained. This concern reflects the fact that to be successful, gardens have to have strong grassroots engagement; top-down implementation is a pitfall. When city agencies initiated past gardening projects without verifying community interest, these projects have fallen into disuse. We recommend Dakota County Parks make an effort to engage communities at a grassroots level. Education and other programming is a good opportunity for this, and survey responses indicate that there is an appetite for it. Other gardening communities have also engaged communities by holding regular volunteer events. Organized volunteer days can help more equitably distribute work for an open access garden (another concern raised by respondents). Having different uses within the park (gardening, foraging, playgrounds, gathering spaces) facilitates these community events (think: parents garden while their kids play in the playground).Community outreach is also crucial for addressing vandalism and theft. When gardens have strong support and buy-in from the surrounding neighborhood, food is less likely to be stolen or vandalized. For outreach, organizing, and relationship building, other gardens have benefited from collaborating with Master Gardener organizations that teach “individuals about gardening and in return [require] a certain number of volunteer hours for community outreach.”
FPL Benefits & Responsibilities
Before choosing to participate in an FPL, participants will need to understand the benefits and responsibilities associated with an FPL.
Benefits:
- Connecting with other community members
- Connecting with nature and the outdoors
- Learning more about gardening, harvesting, and growing food
- Sharing knowledge and helping others get involved with and interested in food production
- Taking home fresh food that you grew or harvested yourself
- Sharing fresh food with other members of the community
Responsibilities:
Each of the FPLs have different needs, but they are all dependent on the time and commitment of community members.
Open-access: This model does not take up much time for most participants. Most people will visit the garden in their own time and won’t be responsible for maintaining the garden. A group of highly committed volunteers or paid individuals will be necessary for this model to function. As previously mentioned, coordinated volunteer events can be a way to organize committed volunteers.
Foraging: This model does not require a huge time commitment from most of its participants, but one can’t participate unless they already know what plants to harvest and how to do it. Participants will also need to understand guidelines for safety and avoiding overconsumption. A group of volunteers or paid individuals is recommended for maintenance, educating new visitors, and creating guidelines. Additional support should be provided, like a pamphlet, to help participants identify and forage plants. TCP can incorporate Indigenous perspectives and knowledge into the process of educating people about how to use a foraging area safely and sustainably. As one respondent wrote, “I am Native American Turtle Mountain Tribe. I believe foraging is the best for the land. Native Americans can guide the process and help others to learn about foraging opportunities. This will encourage people to keep all lands clean and available.”
Community growing project: This model requires a large amount of support from community members, who will be tasked with carrying out a lot of the manual labor for the project. Instructions and outside support from an experienced gardener will help make the project safer, more successful, and more do-able.
Individual plots: This is the most involved version of FPL for most participants. Members will be responsible for planting in and maintaining their personal plots. TCP could provide support by offering classes, providing tools, answering questions, etc.
FPL Accessibility
The accessibility of different FPL models is something to be considerate of when deciding how to proceed. Different FPL models may be more or less physically accessible depending on a person’s physical disability. As one interviewee explained,
“I know that other people were like, Oh, this [foraging] isn’t very accessible for people who are handicapped. And I’m like, well, that honestly depends on your handicap. I could see where foraging would be rather inaccessible for somebody in a wheelchair. On the other hand, while I do have physical disabilities, I find foraging more accessible.”
Additionally, certain models may be more accessible to people who cannot commit a lot of time to maintaining a garden. As an interviewee explained, foraging areas provide an opportunity to engage with an FPL without requiring consistent engagement, citing a mental disability as one obstacle to consistently visiting the park.
Because different FPLs address different accessibility concerns, having multiple FPL options in Thompson Park may maximize accessibility. Multiple survey respondents pointed out that different models could exist in the park, and that we don’t have to choose one above all others.