Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 csse aaeetRsac rjc fteUD oetSrie ok Mountain Rocky [email protected] Service, Bitterroot Wilderness E-mail: the Forest Leopold and USDA Aldo Plan the Fire the of National at Station. the Project scientist Research by Research sponsored social Management was research Ecosystem article supervisory This Institute. the Research is Watson Alan oit n aua eore,20:705–721 Copyright Resources, Natural and Society hog esnleprecs oee.Frisac,Bso(96 ecie cultural describes (1996) Basso instance, begins For generally however. experiences, setting Graefe personal through visits. particular they and more a as or Moore to one only attachment after experiences. ‘‘places’’ only place lived develop become that to through suggest Spaces meanings also own. (1994) with its endowed with- of fact, space,’’ become ‘‘blank In characteristics is visited. setting important never physical or unexperienced examines out seldom Tyler an that that but research and suggested important little (1977) Vining is considered rela- Tuan there have places 2005; although may to visit, al. people attached not Local et values do 1998). al. they Stewart Rogan et places and 1996; with Williams Endter-Wada tionships 1992; Schroeder 2000; al. 1993; et al. Williams Carroll al. et 1999; and et Eisenhauer (Brandenburg 2005; Mitchell making Anderson about 1998; decision knowledge and land incorporating Davenport public of 1995; in value values the suggest community to local evidence increasing is There O:10.1080/08941920701420154 DOI: online print/1521-0723 0894-1920 ISSN: nesadn lc ennso h Bitterroot the on Meanings Place Understanding hr r xetosi h ieauet h eifta tahetol comes only attachment that belief the to literature the in exceptions are There drs orsodnet aiGnesn OBx10,Cno,M 92,USA. 59826, MT Condon, 1008, Box PO Gunderson, Kari to correspondence Address and scientist management resource Interdisciplinary postdoctoral a 2006. November is 3 Gunderson accepted Kari 2005; September 9 Received loLoodWlens eerhIsiue isua otn,USA Montana, Missoula, Institute, Research Wilderness Leopold Aldo WATSON ALAN AND GUNDERSON KARI # ai pria eerh oilvalues those social alter research, may appraisal that rapid projects planned Keywords lands to public reactions with residents anticipate to relationships important and relationships. more local are others locations understanding some and than why of Managers describe from descriptions about that treatments. not. narratives asked their management benefit through also have fuel in were can to they residents emerged response Community places scales, planners their not. those different do influence they that from very those things two visited and of visit at have set indicate they values, the they places results of differentiate Study places people sets them. to First, Two valued scales. ascribe they several they why on identify values and exist to forest relationships asked of the local were range that on Participants a valued identified. approach, they was research places values appraisal Bitterroot community rapid the and a with personal Using relationships Montana. community Forest, and personal National local describes study This 07Tyo rni ru,LLC Group, Francis & Taylor 2007 ainlFrs,Montana Forest, National adcp-ee ultetet adcp enns lc attachment, place meanings, landscape treatment, fuel landscape-level 705 Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 0 .GnesnadA Watson A. and Gunderson K. 706 htspotseii ol n eie ciiis(tkl n hmkr1981; Shumaker and (Stokols conditions and activities features desired providing and at place goals a life specific of to support importance purpose the that and in meanings 831). reflected give 2003, place, that Vaske relationships and and (Williams emotions (Proshansky for lives individual 59). con- repository the broadly 1983, which of in al. consisting world person et physical the the of about self-identity cognitions the ceived of substructure 2003). a Vaske as and Williams defined 1994; Graefe, and Moore 1992; al. et opsdo w ao dimensions: 2003). major Stedman two 2005; of 2003; (Cheng composed Manzo environment 2001; the Stedman value and and Jorgensen sentiments 2003; experience, emotional al. powerfully perceive, as et people described how often connectiv- influence is The 1993). places that con- al, and et heightened people Mitchell and between 2002; places ity (Schroeder about management sentiments their strong about unusually cerns involving 2000) al. et niomn ny‘st onsadgvsfr oteesca constructions’’ social these to physical form the gives that suggests and (2003) bounds 671). Stedman ‘‘sets (p. though only 1994), environment Jackson 1991; Shields u o pcfe nteltrtr.Sm uhr ml ietrltosi between setting relationship direct experienced a imply and authors the Some features literature. of the landscape in influences specified interpretations environment not physical but human the How 2003). through (Stedman landscape specific dycagn oit,mgainadubnzto aeteerltosisaccrued relationships rap- a these scarce. is In make increasingly places. place urbanization generations sensing of and spent across sense migration lives believes from society, accruing, (1996) changing stops Basso idly never Apache, analy- and into accrued the place has learned Among of what lessons decisions. mention accrued current bring through of to communicated sis conversations and Apache places western in to names assigned are that meanings ei ra rrrl u eie nhmnitrrttoso h etn,wihare which setting, of the construction’’ of ‘‘Social interpretations human it. many in with predominates resides experience but through rural, constructed or forces urban the it of be study that less suggested with have (1998) do, they that on way been the has areas. look research rural to urban place shaping came most and places that urban sociology, however, how concluded, community (2000) psychology, Gieryn planning. environmental geography, described human Tuan particular. that in places noted individual’s specific an to to and and referring general, place from ‘‘geopiety,’’ in Moore dates of nature, work 2005; concept with this of the bonding Anderson Much introduced 1992). who and al. (1977), et (Davenport Williams Tuan al.1981; decades et Schreyer two 1994; Graefe over for management of concept The Lands Public to Connectivity Human h odn hnmnnbtenuesadpae a encnetaie as conceptualized been has places and users between phenomenon bonding The mtoa tahet to attachments Emotional rie n akvc 19) umn(92,adWlim n Stewart and Williams and (1992), Hummon (1994), Garkovick and Greider sacne fmaigcntutdb xeine lmnadLw(1992) Low and Altman experience. by constructed meaning of center a as es fplace of sense lc attachment place lc identity Place place es fplace of sense rtns where writings, and es fplace of sense lc attachment place ersnstesmoi motneo lc sa as place a of importance symbolic the represents place a ena motn oi fsuyi ulclands public in study of topic important an been has lc dependence Place ersn unique a represent lc identity place Suae n alr18;Rdn1993; Ryden 1983; Taylor and (Shumaker sntitisct h hsclstigitself, setting physical the to intrinsic not is place nldsmaig epegv oa to give people meanings includes aebe tde ntefed of fields the in studied been have and stefntoa eineo a on reliance functional the is lc dependence place es fplace of sense es fplace of sense lc identity Place lc attachment place (Eisenhauer simplied, is (Williams a been has Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 ilase l 1992). al. et Williams al 90,te rniindt odpout auatrn stedominant the as manufacturing the products until wood based to agriculture transitioned predominately was then economy 1900s, local early the 1855, in ervation 77 Forest. About National 1). Bitterroot Selway-Bitterroot the (Figure the within reaching west finally the and to transi- to areas, Wilderness floor, east nonwilderness valley an roadless the features to in upslope Valley, lands wildland Bitterroot the private the Missoula. to developed of of tioning with side south beginning west Montana, continuum, the western west on in Front, located Bitterroot is The Forest National Bitterroot The Area Study to decisions practices make to stewardship Service Forest forest the in modify trust of lack (Daniels affect suggested that a psychology’’ was fire there fires, and root management fuels of 31). ‘‘inseparability southwestern with 2001). 2001, (Daniels landscape, an in changed have the firefighters is land with and and There forest Service, residents Forest among the private with relationships other, and Bitterroot each fires, of Trust, these acres Since 350,000 State than Montana. Montana more burned Forest, wildfires 2000, National of summer Landscape the Forest During National Bitterroot the on Fire a of quality the of assessment gr ae(ijba n ore20;Side n oa 03 itre al. et Winter 2003; man- that Toman decisions and fuels Shindler and 2006; fire the Borrie trust and fully 2004). (Liljeblad not signifi- do make that public shown agers the have places, of other portions and Forest cant Bitterroot the in studies, Additional etdcso aigbtwscletdt ud aadu ulreduction fuel hazardous a guide to collected lands. was Forest manage- National but resource whom on any of in making treatment value most has decision residents, information local This region. ment by the Forest to indigenous National not Bitterroot are the to them. attached with values relationships and understanding places to describing rela- substantially fea- through have contributed defining relationships People have three meaningfulness. these scientists the and and rapidly with form, places, a material with important, in location, tionships still even being is that places place of suggested of 1983), tures has concept al. including the (2000) 2001), et society Gieryn changing 1992). Stedman (Proshansky (Chawla and belongingness rootedness Jorgensen 1992), and 1998; (Hummon Hay beyond attachment 1996; community attachment Stewart of and both of (Hammitt dimensions degree also with additional (1992) correlated of al. highly proposed et dimensions was Williams experience attachment location. past particular of place a amount in the use that of found frequency and use of years itrcly fe h aihpol eedslcdt h ltedIda Res- Indian Flathead the to displaced were people Salish the after Historically, Bitter- the with associated impacts social the of analysis completed recently a In hssuyatmt ocet nudrtnigo h esnladcommunity and personal the of understanding an create to attempts study This were attachment place of predictors best the found (1994) Graefe and Moore oa ausatce otelandscape the to attached values local nesadn lc enns itrotN 707 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding = ra nefc,te orae ainlFrs ad,then lands, Forest National roaded to then interface, urban lc dependence Place place identity n h eaieqaiyo lentv places. alternative of quality relative the and euewlln iefuels fire wildland reduce and sbsdo nidvda’ rgroup’s or individual’s an on based is % n hr a nepesdne to need expressed an was there and , dependence ftepoet ntewtrhdis watershed the in property the of te eerhr have researchers Other . identity and Wto 2001). (Watson dependence Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 0 .GnesnadA Watson A. and Gunderson K. 708 lotyn omiti togrltosi oarclueadntrlresources, natural and agriculture to are relationship communities strong These a centers. maintain and business to area com- high-technology Missoula trying rural the in and also very to service county once commuters of The and growing communities means. retirees, into economic fastest influx evolving and an are the values by here different was characterized munities with is and people Valley 43 Bitterroot new s 1990 the of a Today the experienced 2001). (Swanson during Darby, Montana and population Hamilton, in industries, Stevensville, increase agriculture economy. Florence, the and of of products communities core the wood represents the National now to Bitterroot sector service related the the was on and the income harvest controversy. 87 of labor timber of declined part basic has point peak harvest latter focal a timber a the represented Forest, became until which practices continued 1969, management products Since forest wood when and depen- century, economy agriculture combination A upon 2001). (Swanson dent economy Bitterroot the in industry aal ony hc opie oto h itrotwtrhdicuigthe including watershed Bitterroot the of most comprises which County, Ravalli iue1. Figure itrotfront. Bitterroot % y19,ol 13 only 1992, By . % fRvliCounty’s Ravalli of % Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 alyevrnet h ult flf nteBtero alyi ih n tis it and high, the is and Valley opportunities, landscape. Bitterroot arid mountain recreational fairly the the a outdoor otherwise of in resources, is the naturalness the natural life and through to of of and wilderness connected down quality Most as deeply flows The Forest. that protected water environment. is National the valley Valley Bitterroot of much Bitterroot the of the by source above managed Range largely Bitterroot latter the with h osatreauto ffnig snwdt oei,wt h mlcto that implication the with in, come to refers data Iteration new study. as this data findings in of used of triangu- reevaluation were a and constant reliability of 2002) the al. elements informant and et characteristic key (Taplin the members, validity methodology are lated community groups the focus of community range maximize and a interviews, to with use Interviews the attempts 1997). or (Manderson Triangulation, methods, iteration. (Beebe multiple and approach techniques research of of appraisal triangulation rapid used: a were of 1995) principles methodological basic Two Research Appraisal Rapid National Bitterroot the much with as have capture people to relationship knowledge the Forest. community about local possible as on event. context focusing disturbance a methods a in research to understand ive due to disruption order emotional quanti- in of a together level in back dissected the put be way are then cannot holistic places and location to manner a bonds to reductionist emotional and relationship tative, personal whole very person’s are The context-embedded losses deep. address where to fire, methods as qualitative such issues, through understood better be can qualitative place. respondents, uses of specifi- that by and meanings research relationship the ranked of human-environment cally the body be examine Davenport expanding to meanings. to an methodologies of research values subset describe critical (2005) of this existing Anderson using some list do and out they leaving a what be of value predetermining may people body researchers why by coherent discern Also, to a possible method. typically accrue not to is It ability ships. our in limits clarity 2005). conceptual that Williams of and place lack (Patterson the of knowledge about ten- values 1990s, authors 1986). the on some Since al. among area. research building study et specific impor- been Haas their some has to or 2000; sion relation parks, in national Stokes values wilderness, of hypothesized and to hierarchy rate tance Cordell to a asked explicit 2000; usually make are Reed Respondents to environ- and encouraged for are system (Brown respondents rating often importance quantitative which Researchers finite, in life. a of values using quality mental understand by of back to method aspects dates method various Rokeach’s ranking method to employ a This participants attach suggested is. (1973) people study value Rokeach importance the when each the to s, important 1970 values early how potential the of to of indications list for Com- asked a landscapes. to and offered related have values describe researchers to monly, developed been have methods Several Methods oaheea nesadn flnsaelvlvle,ti td sdqualitat- used study this values, level landscape of understanding an achieve To places these of values the that suggests approach place-based landscape-level, A relation- understand to approach quantitative this using to limitations are There nesadn lc enns itrotN 709 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 1 .GnesnadA Watson A. and Gunderson K. 710 rp o h eerhr hspoesivtsrsac atcpnst aethe take to participants research invites photo- the process interprets This process participant collaborative researcher. the as a the listener is for a elicitation becomes graph ‘‘Photo photographs researcher (2004), the Harper the 1986; Loeffler on whereby Collier to and focuses between Collier According power interview 2001; (Carlsson in 2002). the participant asymmetry research because the the than participant reduces rather It and 2002). researcher (Harper mechanical forest. the agenda the that cut, research of informed (4) the portion were of burn; wilderness the and Interviewees in cut only. applied (3) burn be only; not treatments (5) cut would (2) Possible and treatments burn; burn; treatments. and and mechanical crush stack, and machine (1) fire include: using prescribed and could could important alone, of treatments treatments identified fuel reduction combination mechanical fuel had using a Hazardous alone, they Front. fire Bitterroot prescribed after using the include of interviewees map all a on to ‘‘after’’ places and presented ‘‘before’’ fuel were showing proposed photographs to treatments fixed-point input of for examples Front Two Bitterroot them. treatments. the to with avail- meaning relationship were had their Front understanding that Bitterroot fuel places the hazardous specific of locate would Maps to it. How respondents valued (3) participants for they identified, at? why able they describe time the place to each spent spend important, asked the For you never consider were places? you to do or important that these map seldom areas interest affect this have there treatments of Are on you (2) places that questions Front? specific Bitterroot but three the what have on asked At people time (1) most relationships were here: the Participants reported influence research would places. Bit- Service the specific history, on Forest proposed use with the treatments demographics, fuel by hazardous on Front how gathered terroot and was places, special information of places, meanings specific to attach generalizability versus scale (40–41). individual scale’’ an population at tradeoffs a specificity involves at and sampling how insight individual in of of or tension depth subject fundamental question between actual primary a the ‘‘the and represent as studied’’ findings and conceived being the Patterson be thorough) deeply, to also (richly, According can well population. ‘‘Representativeness sample larger rather (2001), understanding the perceptions, a individual’s Williams in-depth to of an and generalizability characterize size holistic statistical that the meanings than on and and placed values, Bitterroot random, emphasis beliefs, of of with County: than sample small, rather Ravalli The relatively purposeful in 1). was was (Figure communities residents Darby principal and Valley four Hamilton, Stevensville, across Florence, stratified substitute were can Interviews appraisal intended data. team rapid techniques survey these that sound research are suggested nor statistically have 1995), among generate not residents (Beebe to transcribed studies is negotiation Valley in-depth It long-term, of Bitterroot (3) more Front. for relationships reading Bitterroot and of iterative the dimensions generated; with (2) identify were analysis; to they members data of development as and the struc- during interviews guidelines (1) negotiation included: and interview study interaction this al. team the in et research used (Harris for reevaluations process time such iterative tured of The light 1997). in Manderson generated 1997; be may questions research new nrdcn htgah noarsac neve rnsiae notecenter the into images brings interview research a into photographs Introducing in interest was there told were participants focus-group and interviewees All people values and use, meanings, landscape places, of inventory an conduct To Valley. Bitterroot the of residents was study this for interest of population The Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 frltosista eiet taht pcfcpae nteBtero Front. Bitterroot the on final dimensions places a present specific and to to summarize led attach to researchers residents framework three that a by repre- as relationships interviews used of that all was ‘‘codes’’ that coding iter- scheme textual and Multiple, coding reading assigned significance. of or were meaning stages text their ative of the interpretation of researchers’ the Segments sented interviews. the of data tape- as served associated transcripts Each the edited final process. to The analysis text. listening analyzed. transcribed and simultaneously the reading reading by and from iterative edited recording generated rigorous, was data organizing a transcript allowed for facilitated interview interviews software and analysis the study, data of qualitative record this of text use permanent the tran- A for entirety, analyzed. their and in tape-recorded verbatim, were scribed discussions focus-group and interviews All citizens. Analysis Valley Bitterroot and both county) using represent and land organizations state, forest community (federal, of bodies these sustainability governmental of in Members partner- participants approaches. create to management consensus works which forest Council, among Consensus in Forest ships protection the and and districts, prevention fire fire rural wildland wildland improve county’s to the established Force, Task Fire h omnt raiain nlddteRvliCut Wildland County efforts. Ravalli management the on fuel included hazardous information in organizations from considered additional community a groups be fuel The provided was should focus places Two informants hazardous organizations important Tribes. key how community about Kootenai the and Valley communities Among Salish Bitterroot Front. Confederated their detailed the Bitterroot of specific in the member with on experience members treatments broad community reduction were as and alternatives, recognized guides treatment knowledge interview people reduction using with fuel based interviews, hazardous conducted informant informant displaying to Key photographs informant knowledge. and from of museum sampling networks interviews snowball informant their writer, key on using logger, Eight estate conducted director. real also forester, executive were librarian, nonprofit educator, rancher, and retiree, engineer, a curator, agent, were the interviewed insurance of those communities salesperson, principal Among four the Valley. from residents Bitterroot with conducted viewed were 1989). is Front it root Schwartz when 2001; change Carlsson can 1998; photograph (Becker a contexts of different meaning interpretive they the in the because to Also, meaning histories 2002). personal construct the (Harper and can act experiences, personality, photograph positions, and a social biases, Although different of (539). bring view, viewer expertise’’ of their the of point and use photographer photographer’s full the make to reflect and photographs interview the in role leading n htaeiprat n pcfcpae hyd o oa l rg overy to go or all at go not do they places time spend specific with people and relationships where places important, into specific are insight levels: two that provided at and Front groups Bitterroot focus the on and places interviews of Analysis Results otaeporm S vv .,wsue ofcltt nepeieanalysis interpretive facilitate to used was 2.0, Nvivo QSR program, software A wlesmsrcue nevesuigitriwgie n aso h Bitter- the of maps and guides interview using interviews semistructured Twelve nesadn lc enns itrotN 711 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding = eieta nefc raadt upr h fot fthe of efforts the support to and area interface residential = Residential Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 Also: example: For ‘‘solitude’’ places. and these perfection,’’ describe ‘‘inconceivable to ‘‘miraculous,’’ places used other like from were Words different are lives. Forest their National in Bitterroot the on frequent they places other and roads free- like trees, influences old-growth human as of void such example: landscape places, For a developments. wild and with streams, flowing associated commonly features use day in engage to improving opportunities thus example: offers For gain access places. elevation wild of very trailheads significant Ease in to provide activities areas. leading roads recreational roads alpine the by to provided of access access Many the their trails. in is consideration and places significant important A residents. of Valley selection Bitterroot many to important physical is attractive; scenically oriented. tradition; work everything or and to significance; important, contrast of unique features historically natural-roadless; frequented places; familiar, important wild to to else; attached access be to of found ease Front? were places: meanings Bitterroot Watson of the A. types on and primary Time Seven Gunderson Most K. the Important? Spend They You Are Do Why Places Specific What On theme. particular each across interviewees the of sentiments larger the if most, of the encapsulate all, to of chosen not representative were quotes are These interviews. quotes all following across themes The emergent important. consider still but infrequently 712 nqeCnrs oEeyhn Else. Everything to Contrast Unique Natural-Roadless. Places. Wild to Access of Ease ulue hr r tl lcsta ecng oadrcietesolitude the receive and to go can we spiri- that and hunting places aboriginal still for are Mainly There often. use. quite tual Bitterroot the use I miraculous. of kind know, perfect like so don’t just is I It’s that this, inconceivable. places so of those is of kind perfection one clearly the It’s inconceivable, World. just Lost it’s the that it call I like, It’s thing. of sort this and access down can them you cut where go to left road 300- places free a massive many a isn’t the aren’t of there with there And interplay forest that. And that pine trees. have ponderosa old we virgin year where and places stream remaining flowing the of one It’s in. to get half a to this and easy in hour real up an be like like and It’s know, afternoon hours. you visit- the in are two within, 2:00 town lake at of Wilderness home out alpine Wilderness leave from high like the people can when into you like get or, to, can ing, want you you where If place easily. a pretty It’s easy. accessibility, It’s lcsi h itrotNtoa oetofrmn natural many offer Forest National Bitterroot the in Places iigcoet h ewyBtero Wilderness Selway-Bitterroot the to close Living td atcpnsdsusdhwimportant how discussed participants Study Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 Also: example: For important habitat. about alpine streams, with feelings free-flowing associated these they fauna, features flora, or to physical including sentiment Forest and contribute National this Bitterroot that expressed the on features respondents places Some physical Place.’’ the Best described Last ‘‘The as ture Also: inhp epehv ihfeune lcso h itrotNtoa Forest. National Bitterroot the on places frequented with have people tionships lcsietfe nmp fteBtero ainlFrs,bt o pioneering for both Forest, example: National For Bitterroot people. the indigenous for of important and maps of families selection on the to identified contributed ties places cultural and traditions, family niscence, cnclyAttractive. Scenically hsclFaue fSignificance. of Features Physical aiir itrclyIprat rTradition. or Important, Historically Familiar, hswoeae aki eei hr h ot agotcm another there. come up out they’re hang actually goats now the right where Well is so. here or in month back area places. whole rocky This high in being love I and places open sunny, people—mush- solace. the find into can I like run places bike, won’t I and I hike to where places great remote huckleberries, more rooms, places to drawn I’m we whether We’ll get. fashion it to any need do In we and to. whatever there or choose bark down we or go that plants medicinal it collect of to part need any use still We Deep family. my with kid a went as I cabin kid. headwaters Horse a Lost was Lake. the the I nostalgia. Fish or time to into Lakes, the Twin from over headwaters, the grounds Divide, to stomping the Wahoo my is the to country and that right Divide All Creek Horse Bear the Lost and up times few ieteeadloigu tterdeadsen hs ie tnigup standing pines sky. those evening seeing camp- the and little against ridge a ridge the beat the at most to that up on hard the relate looking pretty for you and it’s And there thing, and fire there another nice. had know, and just you’ve You there It’s experiences lake there. to whatnot. the pleasant and up pretty look peaks it’s You part Como nice. the awful see is scenery you the thing, one For n os re n ptervrcmn u tBudrCekon canyon Creek Wilderness a Boulder as at it out knew coming Lake I river Indian So on the into Fork. was up Selway, it West the and through the into trip Creek over first Moose my headed and youth, dad my my through with knew horseback I canyon a It’s to have you when people into there. running not up and go solitude much pretty and nesadn lc enns itrotN 713 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding cnr n euywr iesosue odsrb rela- describe to used dimensions were beauty and Scenery ... rdtoa use. traditional otn sotnrfre oi oua litera- popular in to referred often is Montana infcn xeine,remi- experiences, Significant ... ildiea drive will I Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 oeeooi etr,ashtcbat,adpaeatcmn r l eivdto Forest. of believed National all Prosperity Bitterroot the are Front. on attachment resources Bitterroot example: water place For the the and upon of dependent beauty, somewhat resources aesthetic be water sectors, the economic to some connected deeply is scenery. or beauty and significance; cultural wilderness; more explore; identity; a to social at places oriented; identified new work values; were protection; intrinsic places watershed frequented scale: less physical for general meanings Or of Seldom types Important? Have primary They You Eight Are That Why but at? Important, Time Consider Spent ‘‘Well You Never and That dam,’’ Areas upper There the assess on Are to weir Association a calibrate Ditch and the up are go by to Forest hired had National sincethatprovidesirrigationtoourplaceIguessI’dhavetogowithComoLake.’’ was I time. Bitterroot ‘‘I one the example, dam on their For places them. why to explain important to reasons work-related Also: itda motn esn o aun oepae nyocsoal iie nthe on visited occasionally only example: places For some Forest. valuing National for were Bitterroot maintenance reasons dam important and as work, listed inventory resources cultural treatments, reduction Watson A. and Gunderson K. 714 o xml:‘Ta’ h ok onanFot htsorRcyMountain Rocky our That’s Front. Mountain Rocky wildlands. the regional Front.’’ other ‘‘That’s to example: comparisons favorable For provided and meanings cultural okOriented. Work Protection. Watershed Oriented. Work oilIdentity. Social ido hn.Ijs hn hyr erbyiprat n fIhdall had I storage. if upstream And for that places important. all additional terribly for and that they’re looking life And be think support we’d nothing. just they druthers for I my and it thing. green own of is valley just land kind the that can’t keep Because you help support- subdivisions. and reservoirs and a or somebody, think maintaining that, I either by like and is owned dry reservoirs choice be like The would there’d dry. things that think be lot ing I a would storage and fields helps wells of of it water kind lot and domestic that of lake have lot natural didn’t a a we be be If to storage. used the what extend augments reservoir that And is pine of picking kind cotton What pine. that? that bark is whatever What White find pine. now? knotty we old that where good places real That the is. of pine last the is This frsdnsi ln hsae.AdIjs edt e nteeadtl to talk and there in get to lot need a just there’s I again, And and, more. area. fire I them this by And Con- along impacted landowners. risk. in been private high residents that’s the is of area with that work an area more is do an South and it’s nor there and in residents get of to lot want a has Horse Lost motn lcsslce ysm td atcpnsimparted participants study some by selected places Important il oko h itrotFoticuighzrosfuel hazardous including Front Bitterroot the on work Field oepriiat h eeitriwdatce practical, attached interviewed were who participants Some h ult flf nteBtero alyi ih n it and high, is Valley Bitterroot the in life of quality The Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 ro oWiestlmn,teslcino motn ie nopse h entire the encompassed sites important of Valley selection Bitterroot the the settlement, inhabited ancestors White whose to Tribes, prior Kootenai and Salish erated hn ifrn n es fepoainit nnw lcs o example: For some- places. brings unknown place into new exploration Each of Forest. sense National a Bitterroot and the different on thing visit to like would and fish the for condition good in than some are important and less To is there values. Front are Bitterroot nonmonetary places the wildlife. other these on and that places of knowing habitat, use pro- unaltered benefits personal the respondents wildlife, recognize also for many benefits, vided human-centered for Forest National idresi eygnrlwy,adte tahmaig ihdsrpiewords people.’’ descriptive many with very ‘‘not meanings and example: attach ‘‘solace,’’ For frontier,’’ they ‘‘the and ‘‘pristine,’’ ways, ‘‘remoteness,’’ like general very in Wilderness utrlSignificance. Cultural e lcst Explore. to Places New Values. Intrinsic nte xml s ‘o know ‘‘You is, example Another Wilderness. h odi ifrn.Eeytm o o o e oehn htyou’ve in that turn something every see And you what. go, know, you you before. time see, seen Every to never different. page is next road the the to get to rush n fi’ u hn a.O,frm tsams prta experience. spiritual a magazine almost Geographic it’s National me a for different. in Oh, it’s living day. know, you shiny like it’s day, sun It’s know, rainy a you a mean, it’s it’s think I if if know, pretty. probably And you was would around. and, it I still, moving But So was it. of noisy. it with as kind still, do isn’t to are most it critters the so has the high season fall as isn’t the wild- water in the the know, it’s And you If spring, it’s out. If are it. with flowers do to something has weather The best. the that of woods some the bear of that’s grizzly neck habitat, this prime that bear in really just up zly of of than areas kind some are me wildlife there’s that to and habitat areas, fish some important the choose less for to condition is had good places in and these there of they’re use personal My esni hti el ierrl opol e pthere. up get people do rarely like many feels very it Not that backpack. is there. full a reason up with knees trails and hands from their ... ways on crawl upper long Grizzly to that willing a and are with people It’s Lake same area. Coquina And Griz- the remote. Creek and to extremely Bear Fish up remote, get these between extremely do of divide is horses any trail, Lakes the the into but on up stay Lakes, get you zly as people long many as very Creek Rock not that think I tsvr rsie h eoees nfc,wt l fteeaesthe areas these of all with fact, In remoteness. The pristine. very It’s oa eiet eonz h motneo eeal protected federally of importance the recognize residents Local nesadn lc enns itrotN 715 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding vntog itrotVle eiet au h Bitterroot the value residents Valley Bitterroot though Even na neve iha noldmme fteConfed- the of member enrolled an with interview an In oersodnsatc au otemn lcsthey places many the to value attach respondents Some ... tseslk tstefote.I’ eyalive.’’ very It’s frontier. the it’s like seems it ... o’ejs oi a in so just you’re ...... sfra griz- as far as ... fIreally I if . on up going Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 Also: Also: example: For it. to attach they there meanings fire Selway-Bitterroot wildland the of the with use interacts in the the it places on of how specific comments portion and visited offered wilderness had respondents the Several they to Wilderness. not attachment or strong whether a landscape, Front indicated Bitterroot respondents the Many on Treatments Reduction Fuel Hazardous Potential these describe to example: used For adjectives ‘‘beautiful ‘‘magnificent.’’ ‘‘immense,’’ common and ‘‘spectacular,’’ the included scenery,’’ frequently of visit they Some places residents. important local with views Watson A. and Gunderson K. 716 itrotNtoa oetwt pca infcneatne otae otsoe the example: over For routes travel Idaho. to to attended significance divide special with Forest National Bitterroot euyo Scenery. or Beauty atrs oorpy egah fteae,adhsoial o fires how historically and weather area, typical on the that based just of with that, geography do issue to topography, the ability resource our patterns, certainly in meet But limited to we’re areas. that fire is those wildland in allow objectives to management authority or authorization have Wilderness to back Getting so. there time saw of ever flow we the before on time speck of a eons for just burned we’re it and burned, it, It burn. it let Fine, in. intensive come our nature with let and off where land back this, the of Let’s scarifying much with proposed. with of there that be practices in say may go would to I prescriptions need And these we over. take think nature don’t Let I fire. And itself. reintroduce will Fire and June in there up get bitterroot. I’m with You covered that early. always It’s left little bitterroots. are with a covered that it’s solid bitterroots road. just know, the it’s of of You patch end of. the biggest off aware the just probably there right Can- just of patch Creek edge It’s bitterroot Trapper the the a on into there’s here down and right looking yon know, You’re You valley. bluff. the immense in an bitterroot of patch big The eidvdal,Idsyta tsmr hnjs pca lc.I’ our It’s place. special a and just tribes than the more for know? it’s territories you that aboriginal homeland, con- say our they’re I’d it and individually, years is me of only thousands Not for into used. families over tinually by Wilderness used the through were divide, that the the Idaho over much them passes pretty and to above ridge trails important The certain everything important. land, very the very is is much footlands pretty Wilderness here this, the up in all important and ridge very the line are of top lakes whole and the peaks these of All etei au a omnteetruhu h inter- the throughout theme common a was value Aesthetic ... h ewyBtero idres edo we Wilderness, Selway-Bitterroot the ... ti l important all is it ...... rtymuch pretty hr were there Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 ad oterondmsi ae upis hyas lc infcneo the on cul- in significance role place their as also well as They identity. landscape, social supplies. the and of water tural public values intangible vast wilderness domestic sweeping, these and more of cultural, own contribution intrinsic, attaching the their be realize to to they instance, valuing seem lands For for they places. but reasons these to visit, work-oriented values seldom have they people place Some ease a differently. the described and are there, but places. found wild contri- experiences received these the benefit access or acknowledged the can features also to they people unique work which hand, ties, that with other of place historical the value and of On the there area. bution or that worked done from have work-oriented have people They are they by func- people. work there both the to instance, are on important For there value are attachment. to, places attached for certain important. are bases reasons consider and still emotional very go places but and these they infrequently to tional places very attach and the to they go, meanings Regarding go the they differently. or described places all residents levels: overlap, at different some go With the very not on two do places least they with at places relationships on have Forest they National that Bitterroot indicated residents Valley Bitterroot Conclusions Also: Wilderness. Selway-Bitterroot the to adjacent and to inside reducing appears in role There example: both stronger a cover. For play hazards forest to would fire’’ critical occurring that fire ‘‘naturally of treatments allowing reduction fuel for to support by through way be threatened a another habitat were and as wildlife meanings danger treatments alter Some fuel reduction trees. reduce fuel more to hazardous harvest using needs for stated agenda’’ Service’s ‘‘hidden Forest the between discrepancy o esnlrltosiswt h hsclevrnet(.. rsasye al. et Proshansky (e.g., environment physical the with relationships personal for lc enns oee,sest xedbyn hs lcste frequent, they places those beyond extend to seems however, meanings, Place usd h idres oersodnsvie kpiimoe perceived a over skepticism voiced respondents some wilderness, the Outside rn spoal rs us.Tepbi nesadn fteneed the of Bitterroot objectives. understanding the the public accomplish on The to management work guess. the fuel I do trust to to probably regards is with Front issue biggest The is line bottom the the avoid where and need treatment this out. really with fire logs balance we the treatment, some getting And think justifying us unconscionable. I gives of is fire that pitfall National research examples with the by landscape these in stand the of instances to of worst many in denudation the head extreme in National its And this the have had. of but fire always lands Forest, other it let and as will lands role, roadless We to a have Forest. also we play apply as will will realization, that fire the that natural to come that to wilderness, going with we’re ultimately think I And wilderness. the in have we the tool onto reduction out fuels move a is to that tendency mean, a I have But, canyon face. up established being once nesadn lc enns itrotN 717 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding lc identity Place a fe enrfre oa h foundation the as to referred been often has Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 1 .GnesnadA Watson A. and Gunderson K. the though place, even that a suggest visit study this never in findings may The people 2003). Vaske and Williams 1983; 718 riae rlnsaefauecnrbtst dniy rvdssm functional some provides identity, site, that to anticipate how unique. we about contributes whole is But feelings be or feature range. of might value, intensity mountain landscape the they a in or or of vary spots crest drainage, also specific entire might attachments be the the be can might that might places person they Special A or scale. sites. drainages of specific terms accurate for in be held vary would meanings analysis the ancestral an of such have intensity in One the landscape. useful of the be with indications would relationships that human measurement on potential treatments fuel vital. alternative is of treat- ences response fuel social alternative of under influence landscape the When the anticipating targets. on that scenarios, fire reduction treatments of ment fuel now fuel effects hazardous is long-term optimum and the interviews project projecting restoration these to ecological from efforts accomplish Information modeling will area. popu- into specific and range incorporated full a level the being to site on insight Future attached for additional meanings Front. with specificity managers of Bitterroot with Service Forest resolution, the provide higher may to lation, a attached at values conducted predominant research the identified study collaborative protec- and the through risk. accumulation in level at fuels values trust deeper hazardous human to increasing a of solutions at tion at generate aimed jointly engagement are to man- public fuel planning these values facilitating hazardous about these and by fire knowledge the understand about agency how decisions understands to uncertain making agency Efforts in are agency the agement. and the by whether landscape used the about is values on suspicious place Some are activities. they involvement public understand- values public the in during managers received of to comment helpful members public be of may roots project the this ing in generated knowledge The Implications represents or landscape. understands this Service to Forest attach the people the well local of values members how some the of that con- suspicious suggests agendas undesirable remain however, hidden of management, of public fuel fear risk support over hazardous the some to Skepticism and drove objectives. nected certainly treatment wildfire fires fuel from replacement hazardous risk stand of be to at might pro- due homes to that modification order about landscape things in Concern and nonwilderness and both. wilderness treatments, wilderness it tect the between by dis- interface don’t, in the influenced the of buildup they at Much be accomplished fuel fire. those would occurring toward naturally and values gravitated was frequent there these cussion wilderness treatment how they likely the only about places toward the learn because both oriented to for relationships difficult landscape, the was of the many of have people With portion relationships landscape. these with a interact with may modifications relationships landscape other and and emotions life. for to warehouse meaning a and as significance serving provide level, that landscape a at cularly uuersac lonest rvd oecmlt nesadn fteinflu- the of understanding complete more provide to needs also research Future this in used approach research appraisal rapid the that confidence have We treatments fuel hazardous how into insight some provided also research This = rdtoa ennsatce osvrlaes n ennscan meanings and areas, several to attached meanings traditional place scniee motn ote,parti- them, to important considered is Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 rnebr,A .adM .Crol 95 orpae rmn:Teefc fpaecreation place of effect The mine: or place, Your 1995. Carroll. S. M. and M. A. Brandenburg, aepr,M .adD .Adro.20.Gtigfo es fpaet lc-ae man- place-based to place of sense from Getting 2005. Anderson. H. D. and A. M. Davenport, natu- in concept integrating an as ‘‘Place’’ 2003. Daniels. E. S. and Kruger, E. L. S., A. Cheng rw,G n.P ed 00 aiaino oetvle yooyfruei National in use for typology values experiences. forest Depicting a 2001. of B. Validation Carlsson, 2000. Reed. P. and. G. Brown, el .M 97 h hsso place. of ghosts The 1997. M. M. Bell, iehur .W,R .Kanc,adD .Ban.20.Atcmnst pca lcson places special to Attachments 2000. Blahna. J. D. and Krannich, S. R. W., B. Eisenhauer, In Service presentation. Forest A Daniels wilderness: Steve of 2001. value S. social Daniels, The roles: Future 2000. Stokes. J. and K. Cordell, 1986. Collier. M. and J. Collier, In attachment. place Childhood 1992. L. Chawla, eb,J 95 ai ocpsadtcnqe frpdappraisal. rapid of techniques and concepts Basic It’s 1995. photojournalism: J. Beebe, and photography, documentary sociology, Visual 1998. H. Becker, as,K .1996. H. K. Basso, 1992. Low. M. S. and I. Altman, References ido eerhwl otiuet l fteeobjectives. these of This all public. to the contribute with will engagement associated research collaborative risk more of gaining at kind and values 2006), lands, noneconomic Borrie public and and with economic (Liljeblad trust pro- protecting treatment building management fuel and on fuel priority understanding emphasis science and select significant fire social and placing lands of locate are public are to grams type national efforts invisible, Currently, this modeling crucial. the include also in are proactively layer are activities presence, to first which their the efforts as landscape, Future measured data real. Bitterroot ever very the doubt has to no instrument attach people laboratory meanings no because tioned ntrWd,J . .Ban,R rnih n .Busn 98 rmwr o under- for framework A 1998. Brunson. M. and Krannich, R. Blahna, D. D., J. Endter-Wada, rie,T n .Groik 94 adcps h oilcntuto fntr n the and nature of construction social The Landscapes: sociology. 1994. in Garkovick. place L. for and space T. A Greider, 2000. F. T. Gieryn, nevrnetlvle n adcp meanings. landscape and values environmental on gmn:A nepeieIvsiaino lc ennsadpretoso landscape of perceptions and meanings place of change. Investigation interpretive An agement: Forests. and People for Center Proceedings lands: Bolle public MT: western on treatments fuel of agenda. research science social a for Propositions Resources politics: resource ral Press. Plenum York: New 253–278. Low, M. S. oetplanning. Forest 42–51. lhuhBl 19)cnlddta h eleso hsso lc sotnques- often is place of ghosts of realness the that concluded (1997) Bell Although ulclns naayi fatvte,rao o tahet,adcmuiyconnec- community and attachments, for reason activities, of tions. analysis An lands: public perspective. Press. Mexico New of University Albuquerque: ams)alamte fcnet In context. of matter researchers a all (almost) Press. Mexico New of University Albuquerque: nter n research and theory in tnigsca cec otiuin oeoytmmanagement. ecosystem to contributions science social standing environment. oit a.Resources Nat. Society oit a.Resources Nat. Society 16:87–104. d .Posr 49.Lno:Fle Press. Falmer London: 84–96. Prosser, J. ed. , n.J Wilderness J. Int. ua Sociol. Rural nesadn lc enns itrotN 719 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding idmst nplaces in sits Wisdom o.Sci. For. o.1.NwYr:Peu Press. Plenum York: New 12. vol. , 46(2):240–247. 59:1–24. lc tahet ua eair n niomn:Advances environment: and behavior, human attachment, Place 12:21–441. iulAtrplg:Poorpya eerhmethod research a as Photography Anthropology: Visual 6(2):23–24. 18:625–641. hoySociety Theory — cn.J dc Res. Educ. J. Scand. adcp n agaeaogtewsenApache western the among language and Landscape mg-ae eerh udbo o qualitative for guidebook A research: Image-based ainlcneec ntesca acceptability social the on conference National nu e.Sociol. Rev. Annu. lc attachment Place 26:813–836. oit a.Resources Nat. Society d .Brhil,3–4 Missoula, 30–34. Burchfield, J. ed. , 45(2):125–143. u.Organization Hum. cl Appl. Ecol. d.I lmnand Altman I. eds. , 26:463–496. 8:381–398. 8(3):891–904. oit Nat. Society 54(1): . . Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 az,L .20.Rltosist o-eieta lcs oad eocpulzto of reconceptualization a Towards places: non-residential to Relationships 2003. C. L. Manzo, or,R .adA .Gaf.19.Atcmnst erainstig:Tecs frail-trail of case The settings: recreation the to of Attachments places 1994. Forest Graefe. 1993. R. A. McLaughlin. and J. L. W. meaning. R. and Moore, place Carroll, S. of M. dimensions Force, multiple E. J. Exploring Y., worse: M. Mitchell, or better For 2005. C. L. Manzo, experi- adventure 1997. outdoor of L. meanings the of Manderson, decisions. study management elicitation fuel photo and A fire 2004. wildland A. in T. owners’ Loeffler, Trust Lakeshore 2006. attitude: Borrie. an T. as W. place and of A. Sense Liljeblad, 2001. Stedman. C. R. and S. B. Jorgensen, 1994. B. R. Jackson, umn .M 92 omnt tahet oa etmn n es fpae In place. of sense and sentiment Local and attachment: context. Community review developmental 1992. Watson in A M. A. place procedures: D. of and Hummon, assessment Sense Gunderson Rapid 1998. K. 1997. R. Hay, Fawcett. N. and elicitation. Jerome, photo of N. case K., A pictures: Harris, about Talking 2002. D. Harper, values. Wilderness 1986. Walsh. R. and Hermann, E. E., G. Haas, 720 amt,W .adW .Seat 1996. Stewart. P. W. and E. W. Hammitt, rsasy .M,A .Fba,adR aiof 93 lc-dniy hsclsocial Physical place: Place-identity: 1983. on Kaminoff. traditions R. research and Fabian, Maintaining K. 2005. A. R. M., H. D. Proshansky, Williams, and E. M. Patterson, 2001. R. D. Williams, and E. M. Patterson, ye,K .1993. C. K. Ryden, 1973. M. Rokeach, perceptions and Awareness hide: to Nowhere 2005. Horwitz. P. and O’Connor, M. R., Rogan, cree,H .20.Eprecn auei pca lcs uvy ntenorth-central the in Surveys places: special in nature Experiencing 2002. W. natural H. experience Schroeder, people how Understanding heart: the of Ecology 1996. W. H. Schroeder, of determinant a as meaning Environmental 1981. White. R. and Jacob, G. M., R. Schreyer, hed,R 1991. R. Shields, cwrz .18.Vsa tngah:Uigpoorpyi ulttv research. qualitative in photography Using Ethnography: Visual 1989. D. Schwartz, Routledge. tahett place. to attachment 2001). 13, July (accessed http://www.undp.org/popin/books/reprod/chap2.htm Report. cal procedures assessment anthropological users. management. public into spaces special Incorporating heart: Psychol. Environ. J. ence. Wilderness J. Int. properties. their toward attitudes attachment critique. PA. College, State 18–23, May Management, agement etcpicpe,mtos n aeexamples case and methods, principles, neutic ol oilzto fteself. the of socialization world progress. scientific and thought of Diversity fevrnetlcag,adterifuneo eainhp ihplace. with relationships on influence their and Psychol. change, environmental of region. Westview. CO: Boulder, 13–27. In environments. University. State IV Vol. In ferences: recreation. in behavior spatial Press. Iowa of University Ames: Sociol. .LiueRes. Leisure J. esr Sci. Leisure 12(2):119–153. .For. J. ae rsne tteSxhItrainlSmoimo oit n Resource and Society on Symposium International Sixth the at presented Paper . u.Organization Hum. 25:147–158. d.I lmnadS .Lw 5–7.NwYr:Peu Press. Plenum York: New 253–278. Low, M. S. and Altman I. eds. , lcso h agn lentv egahe fmodernity of geographies Alternative margin: the on Places 100:8–14. h aueo ua values human of nature The apn h niil adcp:Fllr,wiig n h es fplace of sense the and writing, Folklore, landscape: invisible the Mapping es fpae es ftime of sense A place, of sense A d.R cryr .Jcb n .Wie 9–0.Kn,O:Kent OH: Kent, 294–300. White, R. and Jacob, G. Schreyer, R. eds. , 2(1):39–43. aua eoremngmn:Tehmndimension human The management: resource Natural 16:17–31. ouainadrpoutv elhporme:Apyn rapid Applying programmes: health reproductive and Population 25:67–86. 36(4):536–556. .Evrn Psychol. Environ. J. 56:375–378. .Evrn Psychol. Environ. J. aesadpoednso h ple egah Con- Geography Applied the of proceedings and Papers .Evrn Psychol. Environ. J. e ok ntdNtosPplto udTechni- Fund Population Nations United York: New . es fpae alfrcntutcaiyadman- and clarity construct for call A place: of Sense olcigadaayigqaiaiedt:Herme- data: qualitative analyzing and Collecting 23(1):47–61. e ok rePress. Free York: New . hmag,I:Sagamore. IL: Champaign, . .Evrn Psychol. Environ. J. e ae,C:Yl nvriyPress. University Yale CT: Haven, New . 3:57–83. .Evrn Psychol. Environ. J. 21:233–248. .For. J. a.AesJ. Areas Nat. iulStud. Visual 25:361–380. 91(4):32–37. 18:5–29. d .Ewert, A. ed. , 77(1):13–26. .Environ. J. 6(2):37–43. London: . Place Qual. . Downloaded By: [Gunderson, Kari] At: 17:27 19 July 2007 hnlr .adE oa.20.Fe euto taeisi oetcmuiis longitudi- A communities: forest in strategies reduction Fuel 2003. Toman. E. and B. Shindler, aln . .Shl,adS o.20.Rpdehorpi seseti ra ak:A parks: urban in assessment ethnographic Rapid 2002. Low. S. and Scheld, S. D., Taplin, ilas .R n .I twr.19.Sneo lc:A lsv ocp hti idn a finding is that concept elusive An place: of Sense 1998. Stewart. I. the S. Beyond and 1992. R. Watson. D. E. Williams, A. and Roggenbuck., W. J. Patterson, E. M. R., D. Williams, physical the of contribution The construction? social a just really it Is 2003. C. R. Stedman, hmkr .A n .B alr 93 oadacaiiaino epepaerelationships: people–place of clarification a Toward 1983. Taylor. B. R. and A. S. Shumaker, ilas .R n .J ak.20.Temaueeto lc tahet aiiyand Validity attachment: place of measurement The 2003. Vaske. J. J. and R. D. Williams, public in reflected outcomes desired and 2001. emotions, E. A. Values, Watson, 1999. Tyler. E. and J. Vining, 1977. F. Y. Tuan, settings. of view 2001. transactional L. A Swanson, places: and People 1981. Shumaker. A. S. and D. Stokols, itr . .Vg,adS cafe.20.Eaiigsca rs nfesmanagement fuels in trust social Examining 2004. McCaffrey. S. and Vogt, C. G., Winter, a nlssfrpbi support. public for analysis nal aesuyo needneNtoa itrclPark. Historical National Independence Montana. of of study University case West, Mountain Rocky the for Center O’Conner MT: oei csse management. ecosystem in home place. to attachment symbolic and Sci. emotional Examining Institute, metaphor: commodity Research Wilderness Leopold Aldo the and MT. Missoula, Forest National Bitterroot from analysis tions place. Praeger. of York: sense New to 219–251. environment Geller, S. E. and Feimer R. N. eds. oe fatcmn opae In place. to attachment of model A eeaialt fapyhmti approach. psychometric a of generalizablity plans. management forest to responses Associates. Erlbaum Lawrence NJ: In strategies. onto,sca eair n h environment the and behavior, social Cognition, 14:29–46. .For. J. nulse eott h itrotNtoa oet ac.Available March. Forest. National Bitterroot the to report Unpublished . pc n place and Space h itrotVle fwsenMnaaae cnmcprofile economic area Montana western of Valley Bitterroot The nesadn lc enns itrotN 721 NF Bitterroot Meanings: Place Understanding itrotNtoa oet omnt eehn uvyoe-ne ques- open-ended survey telephone Community Forest. National Bitterroot 102(6):8–15. odn Arnold. London: . oit a.Resources Nat. Society .For. J. .For. J. niomna scooy ietosadperspectives and Directions psychology: Environmental 101(6):8–15. u.Eo.Rev. Ecol. Hum. 96:18–23. o.Sci. For. d.J avy 4–8.Hillsdale, 441–488. Harvey, J. eds. , 49:830–840. u.Organization Hum. 16:671–685. 6(1):21–34. 61(1):80–93. Missoula, . Leisure ,