Day-Cappers are places for you to stretch your mind, to try something a little risky, to dare to have fun! You can propose a Day-Capper that is structured around a single presentation (or two), or a panel discussion — but the key is to make sure there is plenty of time for audience participation. Toward that end, we encourage Day-Cappers to be “PowerPoint-Free Zones.” (Or at least keep PowerPoints to a minimum.) Here are the Day-Cappers that were part of the GWS2005 conference in Philadelphia:

• You Are What You Eat: People + Place + Time + Food. A gustatory examination of Phildelphia’s signature food dishes, and how food can enhance interpretation at cultural sites (tasting included).
• Yellowstone Snowmobiles: Assessing the Feasibility of a Mediated Solution. A professional mediator of environmental conflicts led a conflict resolution exercise and audience discussion.
• The NPS Research Permit and Reporting System: Revolutionary, Evolutionary, or Simply a Pain? A “no-holds-barred” discussion of the NPS permit system.
• Urban Parks, Diverse Communities. An exploration of the needs/desires of managers versus those of academics.
• Reporting from the Front Lines of Civic Engagement: Lessons Learned through Involving the Public in Controversial Management Decisions. An audience discussion of public involvement techniques used in the NPS Alaska Region.
• Basing Management Decisions on Science: How Does It Really Work? Participants shared good and not-so-good examples of how scientific study results have been used in their park or protected area.
• Selecting Plant Materials: A Parable of Endemism in Philadelphia-Area Sandwiches. Differences in the endemic sandwiches of the Philadelphia area were used as a symbolic example of the difficulties of selected appropriate plant species/genotypes for restoration work.
• Out from the Park into the Heart of the Community: Filming “A Civic Engagment.” Participants found out how a “speak-chorus” (rapid-fire readings of original diaries, letters, etc.) was used in a collaboration between a park and a high school to create the first-ever NPS program interpreting the Civil War Home Front.
• Creating an Innovative Organization: Overcoming Barriers to the Use of Science. A panel discussion with audience participation probed the social influences that affect how land managers use research findings.
• Finding the Unexpected and Unexpected Use of Findings: Confirming the Unobvious through Social Science Research. Participants interacted with panelists to discover, among other things, some unexpected influences of recreation studies on local community issues and some surprising characteristics of visitors.

Some other possible ideas .... (if any of them really strike your fancy, feel free to use them as the basis for an actual Day-Capper proposal — they are just illustrative examples, not actual ideas under development.)

• Was John Muir Living in a Dream World? Widely regarded as one of the founding fathers of the national park idea, Muir’s brand of mystical nature appreciation struck a chord with many people at the beginning of the 20th century. But is he still relevant now, a century later, in a world where nature is under siege from ever-growing human demands? Or do we need to emphasize a more hard-headed, utilitarian approach to parks?
• The Triumph of Disney; or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Mickey Mouse. Like it or not, the theme park experience has had a profound effect on the way heritage sites are presented and interpreted to the public. In fact, some people think that the heritage community invented the theme park idea at Colonial Williamsburg. Is this so terribly bad? Are there lessons we can learn from the undeniable success of places like Disneyworld?
• Interpreting Evolution. Controversy recently broke out when Grand Canyon National Park allowed a book explaining the canyon from a creationist perspective to be sold in park bookstores alongside mainline geological accounts. What are the obligations (if any) of public parks to provide alternatives to scientific explanations of natural phenomena? Is this a matter of freedom of speech? Can we expect public officials to draw the line between religion and science? If so, how? And where? What are the legal and ethical issues?
• Whose Story Gets Told? The Limits of Inclusivity. The democratization of heritage in an open society means that we are much more open to multivocal interpretation in parks and cultural sites. That’s all well and good, but where do you draw the line? Should we offer a New Age interpretation of Chaco Canyon? Let the KKK have its panel at Martin Luther King NHP? Provide a Japanese-sympathetic storyline at the USS Arizona Memorial? If these sorts of things transgress the limit, by what rationale do we explain the limit? And who gets to decide where the limit falls?
• Who Needs the Rest of the Planet? America as an (ex?) International Leader in Nature Conservation. Whether by design or not, the exporting of the “Yellowstone Model” of national parks to countries around the world has come under increasing scrutiny and criticism over recent years. At the same time, many would argue that the mantle of leadership once worn by the USA in matters of international park conservation has been ceded — by default — to organizations in other countries. Is that good, bad, or does it even matter?
• Commemorating 9/11: The Importance of Perspective. One of the many consequences of the terrorist attacks was to bring to the forefront of people’s minds the process of commemoration: Who gets to decide which stories of that day and its aftermath will “count” in the official process of creating memorials? Indeed, should that process be led by officials in the first place, or should “the people” decide? And should we not wait for some years in order to get a better sense of where 9/11 fits in to the long-term picture, rather than attempt to create memorials so soon after the fact? Join us for small-group discussions of these important issues.

We hope these ideas spark your creativity!

Back to Call for Proposals «» Back to Submit an Abstract