Landscape Architecture

With this blog being mainly about recreation activities and legislation I thought I'd explore the design of recreation facilities for my last post.  The field of landscape architecture was born in the late 1800's by a gentleman named Frederick Law Olmsted.  At the time the city of New York City was experiencing a severe case of urban blight and the city commissioners speculated that the cause was a lack of green space and recreation opportunities (The American City).   In an effort to combat this a tract of land was purchased in the middle of town and a park design competition was held.  Olmsted, having little formal training, entered the competition and hired a draftsman to draw the illustrations he had in his head.  Olmsted's design focused heavily on passive recreation, such as reading, sitting, and strolling, incorporating many curvilinear trails and open spaces into the design (Charles Leider, former principle HNTB Design).  Ironically, not being a trained landscape architect, the field had yet to be created, Olmsted won the competition and his design became what is now known as Central Park (Charles Leider).  This first design of Central Park has become the crown jewel of the landscape architecture as the first design and possible one of the most popular ever.

Since that time the field of landscape architecture has blossomed, covering designs from urban planning, to recreation.  Trails and parks are the largest part of the recreation field and firms such as PDG in Tulsa, OK focus on this aspect.  I think many of us take for granted the birthplace of parks and trails, and those who create them.  I know I did, until I began studying the field of landscape architecture, earning a BLA at Oklahoma State University.  Landscape Architects thoroughly enjoy creating recreation opportunities for the public, as we view the design process as a recreation opportunity in itself.    

Tobacco in Oklahoma Parks

Gov. Mary Fallin of Oklahoma recently signed into law, legislation that bans all tobacco use in public settings, to include State Parks.  While I'm not a smoker and do appreciate the initiative to make public settings and parks a healthier place, I'm not sure how the enforcement would work?  Previously in 2007 Oklahoma passed a law that required designated smoking areas in public settings, such as restaurants and bars, and to me this makes more sense; smokers and tobacco users are going to use the product no matter what.  Banning tobacco use in parks brings up some issues that I don't think have been considered.  On a golf course for instance, how will law enforcement patrol for smokers?  The whole point of being on a golf course is to escape the urban lifestyle and enjoy the outdoors for awhile, in my opinion introducing police to a golf course to patrol for smokers not only violates this concept, but also is a waste of taxpayer dollars.  I agree with making the public buildings in parks non-smoking, it creates cleaner air and a fresher smell for everyone, but I do think that smokeless tobacco should be allowed as an alternative. 

While I disagree with the legislation, (even being a non-tobacco user) Oklahoma State Parks could use this as a grand opportunity to re-brand themselves as the healthy alternative.  Parks will not only provide a place of respite now, but also a truly clean environment with pure air.  Parks will now be a true escape from the city life of polluted air, and noise, to include tobacco smoke.  Maybe Oklahoma will attract a different kind of user now that smokers and tobacco users are no longer welcome.  A leisure theory states that less tolerant and less consumptive users will always be replaced by more tolerant and more consumptive users.  I think this will be the case with Oklahoma State Parks.

Weightlifting & Supplements

Continuing on the body building topic from last week, I'd like to explore supplements in weightlifting.  I spend a good deal of time up at the gym here at OSU and its obvious who is on the supplements and who is not.  It's always boggled my mind why non-athletes feel the need to get that Greek god body.  I've done some personal studying on supplements and the majority are not good in any form for you.  From talking to trainers and athletes I've found that good old fashioned weightlifting and a diet high in protein and low in fat is the best way to get that great body.

But what about those that want immediate results or to lift the "heavy" weights.  Many turn to supplements.  From the reading I've done(www.livestrong.com, Mayo Clinic Research), testosterone boosters are the quickest way to build muscle and reduce fat levels on the body.  Anabolic steroids fall into this category, and players in the MLB have been under heavy accusation for their use.  Steroids build muscle fast by releasing testosterone that is locked up in the body.  However, side effects occur from this from are as mild as acne to as severe as testicular atrophy and prostate enlargement.

There are pre-workout supplements that are used as well.  According to the Mayo Clinic pre-workout supplements such as Lipo-6 aid in fat burning and creating energy by inducing the user with large amounts of caffeine.  The results are achieved by artificially raising the heart rate, thereby also raising the user's metabolic level.  Serious side effects come from this as well though, such as nervousness, hallucinations and even heart attack.  To me when hallucinations and nervousness are side effects, how are these supplements any different from illegal narcotics?  So what is the drive behind body builders to make use of these supplements, when for no other reason they want to "look good," especially when the side effects are known?  For my body building I'm sticking to the old fashioned diet of fish, chicken and skim milk, I want to be around to see my grandkids. 

Pitching in Baseball

The American Journal of Sports Medicine released an article in 1995 studying injuries in pitchers, specifically the rotator cuff muscles.  It seems that in the quest for faster and faster pitching speeds, the rate of injuries increases also.  Currently the average fastball speed ranges from 88-94 mph with a select few being able to break the 100mph barrier, I think we all remember Randy Johnson disintegrating the bird.  But how much force does it take to throw the ball that hard?  According the study in AJSM 1090 Newtons are generated at the shoulder and 64N-M are generated at the elbow.  Excessive tension was noted from the bicep muscle as it put a strain on the elbow joint.

With the introduction of workout supplements I can't help but wonder how much of an increase in injury rate has occurred since the study was conducted in 1995.  It seems that athletes are getting bigger and bigger and stronger and stronger.  Look at any commercial on t.v. while watching, the athletes resemble the statues of Greek gods.  With this increase in muscle mass, so too would an increase in injury rate to joints.  Tommy Johns surgery is happening at an ever increasing rate to pitchers and I must ask, why do athletes put themselves through this pain?  In all honesty its not a life and death situation if the Rangers don't win the World Series, so why the need for workout supplements and 95mph fastballs? 

Thoughts of a Pilot

As a pilot I like to make sure that I brief myself as thoroughly as possible before each and every flight.  Even during my down time I like to read up on aviation statistics and occasionally accident reports to figure out the how and why, as well as do some chair flying and think what I would do in that circumstance.  Its a great use of leisure time for myself!  Recently I was on the NTSB's website looking at flying statistics and of 472 aviation accidents this past year, 450 of them came from general aviation.  This number is phenomenal to me, and somewhat disconcerting as well.  As  I read through the files of accident reports I noticed that the majority of the accidents were a loss of directional control after flying into instrument conditions. 

There are two types of flying conditions, visual(VFR), when the weather is clear, or instrument(IFR), when the weather is poor.  Air carriers are required to fly under IFR no matter what the weather is and as a result go through more rigorous training.  However, general aviation pilots can stop their training after earning their private license and fly under only VFR conditions.  The private license training rubric requires only 3 hours of simulated instrument training, while to earn a rating to fly under IFR, the pilot must log 40 additional instrument training flight hours.  The reasoning behind this additional training for IFR is due to the ease of disorientation and loss of situational awareness while flying in the clouds.

Airplanes are sophisticated machines, and the instrumentation in them reflects such.  Most general aviation aircraft are equipped with what are known as steam gauges, the round dial gauges.  However, some are equipped with glass panels, essentially a computer monitor that tracks your flight path, aircraft attitude and speed all in one easy to read panel.  An article in Flying Magazine stated the steep learning curve required to learn to fly glass panel aircraft, but also depicted safer flying from those who learn.  The article also shared a story of a pilot, having logged over 700 IFR hours if  my memory is correct, flying an unfamiliar glass panel aircraft into IFR conditions and crashing while enroute due to lack of familiarity with the system.  The military uses glass panel instrumentation in their initial trainer, the T-6, and boasts an incredibly high safety record, much higher than airlines even. 

The airplane that I learned to fly in had steam gauges, and I consider myself a safe pilot and feel that my instrumentation equips me well for the VFR flying that I conduct.  However, recently I began flying a C-172XP with a glass panel and have become spoiled with all the gizmos that come along with it.  I have had to spend many hours re-learning the instrumentation and switch-ology of the system, to feel confident flying the plane as I did in the plane with steam gauges.  I can attest to the difficulty of learning the glass panel as I go through this transitional training.  In addition I love the situational awareness increase that comes from the glass panel.  Now instead of logging locations on a paper map, I can look directly in front of me and see exactly where I am and know my fuel burn, and remaining flight time.  Much as computers have infiltrated our home lives it seems they are creeping into the cockpit as well.  But this time around I welcome the computer and its added safety benefits!